❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the Minister for State Development regarding the protection of rock art on the Burrup Peninsula, specifically asking if industry will be relocated if monitoring indicates potential damage. The Minister replies that there is no evidence to suggest damage will occur.
AnsweredQoN 1181Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
BURRUP PENINSULA, PROTECTION OF ROCK ART 1181. Hon ROBIN CHAPPLE to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for State Development: I refer to the minister’s answer to question without notice 1102 of Tuesday, 12 March 2002, of which some notice was given, and ask - (1) If the “precautionary” monitoring studies referred to in the minister’s answer indicate the potential for damage to rock art sites on the Burrup Peninsula, will the minister recommend that industry not be allowed to proceed on the peninsula but instead be established elsewhere? (2) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
BURRUP PENINSULA, PROTECTION OF ROCK ART
I refer to the minister’s answer to question without notice 1102 of Tuesday, 12 March 2002, of which some notice was given, and ask - (1) If the “precautionary” monitoring studies referred to in the minister’s answer indicate the potential for damage to rock art sites on the Burrup Peninsula, will the minister recommend that industry not be allowed to proceed on the peninsula but instead be established elsewhere? (2) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
(1) If the “precautionary” monitoring studies referred to in the minister’s answer indicate the potential for damage to rock art sites on the Burrup Peninsula, will the minister recommend that industry not be allowed to proceed on the peninsula but instead be established elsewhere? (2) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
(2) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
(1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
BURRUP PENINSULA, PROTECTION OF ROCK ART
I refer to the minister’s answer to question without notice 1102 of Tuesday, 12 March 2002, of which some notice was given, and ask - (1) If the “precautionary” monitoring studies referred to in the minister’s answer indicate the potential for damage to rock art sites on the Burrup Peninsula, will the minister recommend that industry not be allowed to proceed on the peninsula but instead be established elsewhere? (2) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
(1) If the “precautionary” monitoring studies referred to in the minister’s answer indicate the potential for damage to rock art sites on the Burrup Peninsula, will the minister recommend that industry not be allowed to proceed on the peninsula but instead be established elsewhere? (2) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
(2) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
(1)-(2) No. There is no evidence to suggest that rock art sites will be damaged by current proposals.
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.