❓ A parliamentary question regarding asbestos contamination on Austral Street, Williamstown, specifically concerning land ownership history involving Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines (KCGM) and the handling of asbestos inspections and regulations during demolition.
AnsweredQoN 408Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
AUSTRAL
STREET, WILLIAMSTOWN — ASBESTOS CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT
408. Hon ROBIN CHAPPLE to the
Minister for Housing:
I refer to the empty blocks of land on Austral Street,
Williamstown, which are currently under assessment by the Department of
Environment Regulation for asbestos contamination.
(1) How many
of the designated blocks on Austral Street were originally owned by Kalgoorlie
Consolidated Gold Mines?
(2) What designated blocks do KCGM still own and which blocks
are now considered crown land?
(3) Regarding
(1), did the council carry out asbestos inspections of the original dwellings
on these sites before they were demolished by KCGM?
(4) If yes to
(3), were asbestos regulations properly enforced and can the department explain
the asbestos contamination on the sites in question?
(5) If no to
(3), given there is evidence of asbestos contamination at several of these
sites, why not?
(6) Aside from
the block at 38 Austral Street, for which KCGM has claimed responsibility, will
the minister name the four other blocks suspected of being contaminated with
asbestos?
STREET, WILLIAMSTOWN — ASBESTOS CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT
408. Hon ROBIN CHAPPLE to the
Minister for Housing:
I refer to the empty blocks of land on Austral Street,
Williamstown, which are currently under assessment by the Department of
Environment Regulation for asbestos contamination.
(1) How many
of the designated blocks on Austral Street were originally owned by Kalgoorlie
Consolidated Gold Mines?
(2) What designated blocks do KCGM still own and which blocks
are now considered crown land?
(3) Regarding
(1), did the council carry out asbestos inspections of the original dwellings
on these sites before they were demolished by KCGM?
(4) If yes to
(3), were asbestos regulations properly enforced and can the department explain
the asbestos contamination on the sites in question?
(5) If no to
(3), given there is evidence of asbestos contamination at several of these
sites, why not?
(6) Aside from
the block at 38 Austral Street, for which KCGM has claimed responsibility, will
the minister name the four other blocks suspected of being contaminated with
asbestos?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question.
(1)–(2) Please redirect these sections of the
question to the Minister for Lands.
(3)–(6) Please redirect these sections of the
question to the Minister for Environment.
(1)–(2) Please redirect these sections of the
question to the Minister for Lands.
(3)–(6) Please redirect these sections of the
question to the Minister for Environment.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.