❓ Question regarding the Cook Labor government's progress on environmental approvals reform. The Minister responds by highlighting achievements, criticising the Liberal Party's approach, and defending the government's record.
AnsweredQoN 366Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ENVIRONMENT — APPROVALS — REVIEW
366. Mrs J.M.C. STOJKOVSKI to the Minister for Environment:
I refer to the Cook Labor government's commitment to
overhaul Western Australia's environmental approvals.
(1) Can the minister update the house on the delivery
of these important reforms, which will unlock investment in major
job-creating projects while protecting Western Australia's environment?
(2) Can the minister advise the house whether he is
aware of any alternative approach to address these policies?
366. Mrs J.M.C. STOJKOVSKI to the Minister for Environment:
I refer to the Cook Labor government's commitment to
overhaul Western Australia's environmental approvals.
(1) Can the minister update the house on the delivery
of these important reforms, which will unlock investment in major
job-creating projects while protecting Western Australia's environment?
(2) Can the minister advise the house whether he is
aware of any alternative approach to address these policies?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2) I thank the member for Kingsley. It is a very
good question. The member for Kingsley will be aware that in December
last year, this government made a very important announcement that it had
endorsed the outcomes of a review into Western Australia's
environmental approvals system. The review was commissioned by this government and found that approvals processes had
become overly complex, time-consuming
and costly. Here we are, a few short months down the track and we have already
delivered on a number of the key recommendations coming from that
review, which will deliver faster approvals. They include removing the
automatic referral of planning schemes to the Environmental Protection Authority.
In the last budget, $36 million was invested to better assist proponents at the
pre-referral stage to make sure they get the information correct, are properly
triaged and assisted, and to boost assessment staff, as well as many other
initiatives we have taken up. A comment from the Leader of the Liberal Party
recently was that we had accepted only seven of the 39 recommendations. In
fact, the correct information was—I like to make sure that the correct
information gets out—that seven of those recommendations had been
actioned and we are working on the rest. It is important to get the facts
right, member.
Ms L. Mettam interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : I know they do not mean a lot to
people over there, but they are really important.
Last week, the Leader of the Liberal Party announced her own
plan to streamline approvals. When she launched this plan, she accused the
government of being paralysed by ideology. Let us face it. It rings true, does
it not, folks? I am paralysed! I cannot do a thing! I do not want to change
anything. The Treasurer, who is key to these reform processes, is a very shy
and retiring type. She seldom speaks up. She is reluctant to speak her mind. We
all know that about her. We are all absolutely paralysed! What a load of old
tripe. Seriously, what a line to use—paralysed by ideology—when
a government has never done more or taken more action to have more fundamental
reform of the system than ever before.
Ms L. Mettam interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : I will get back to the member. This is
my opportunity to speak. She will get her time. The Liberal Party had some announcements to make. Listening to them was
almost word for word the initiatives we are currently engaged in. In
fact, the Leader of the Liberal Party on the radio, I think with Gary Adshead,
admitted she was taking all the information from the Vogel–McFerran
assessment. There we go. We are paralysed by ideology, but the Liberal Party is
copying its homework from us. The member talked about enabling parallel
approvals, removing appeals for projects
that the EPA chose not to assess and the strict conditions on stop-the-clock
provisions . This is all good stuff, member, because it is our stuff!
These are all components of this government's plan. We announced these
things in December. We are delivering them now.
I could go on, and I will. I must
give the Leader of the Liberal Party some credit because she came up with a policy
that was not a Labor policy. In fact, it came out of a previous Liberal government.
It was for deemed approvals. Going back 15 years, when I think Troy Buswell was
Treasurer, he got a recommendation that deemed approvals should be part of the
reform process. It is a 15-year-old policy, and the member is finally on board,
but at the time she did not tell the public that, back in the previous
government, the Liberal government rejected that reform. It was rejected. Now she is finally on board because
we have taken it up. That is very good to see. If members opposite want
to talk about paralysed ideology, I think they should look no further than the
Liberal Party's energy policy and
its desire to continue using coal-fired power for generation of electricity in
this state. The other big announcement recently from our friends across
the way was that they are going to continue with coal way past 2030, until some
future time when I guess nuclear becomes a possibility. That is their plan.
Ms L. Mettam interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : No. The
member said the Liberal Party will continue to use coal well past 2030. The
member needs to know a couple of things. There is not an easy option here. The
reserves of coal are limited, so it will continue to be difficult after 2030 to
have a reliable supply of coal. The other thing is that the coal-fired generation
in Collie is quite old. If we did not have renewables and we were not making
these changes, any government of the day would have a responsibility to either
spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a major upgrade or invest in new
coal-fired generation in Collie. If coal continues past 2030, the Liberal Party
will be putting the state at risk because that is old kit. If the Liberal Party
is going to do this, which is part of its plan, where has it specified the
hundreds of millions of dollars needed to build new coal-fired power?
Ms L. Mettam interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : If the
Liberal Party wants to go past 2030, this is the reality it has to face. The
other point I want to make is that the people of Collie deserve certainty.
Businesses deserve certainty and clarity. They need a timeline. They need a signal
to invest. What we have from over the way is confusion.
Several members interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : We have
confusion. It is a crying shame.
Point of Order
Mr R.S. LOVE : I have a point
of order.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order! Points of
order are heard in silence.
Mr R.S. LOVE : I understood
the question was around the EPA approvals processes. Now we are discussing coal
generation and investing in power plants at some point in the future. I would
ask that the minister be brought back to the matter at hand in the question.
The SPEAKER : There have been
some interjections, which may have extended the minister's answer, but
I hope he might conclude his answer briefly.
Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr R.R. WHITBY : Thank you,
Speaker. I want to make the point that the people of Collie deserve clarity.
They need certainty. This is not good for
the community down there. The opposition talks about approvals and, yes, reform of the approvals process is absolutely correct and right. It is what we
embarked on, but any new, big coal-fired power
plant is going to require environmental approvals. This is what the alternative
energy policy of this state looks like—uncertainty, massive
costs and a requirement to approve, (a), coal-fired power and then, (b),
nuclear power, which has its own set of huge hurdles and constraints. I will
just leave that there with the Leader of the Opposition. Thank you.
good question. The member for Kingsley will be aware that in December
last year, this government made a very important announcement that it had
endorsed the outcomes of a review into Western Australia's
environmental approvals system. The review was commissioned by this government and found that approvals processes had
become overly complex, time-consuming
and costly. Here we are, a few short months down the track and we have already
delivered on a number of the key recommendations coming from that
review, which will deliver faster approvals. They include removing the
automatic referral of planning schemes to the Environmental Protection Authority.
In the last budget, $36 million was invested to better assist proponents at the
pre-referral stage to make sure they get the information correct, are properly
triaged and assisted, and to boost assessment staff, as well as many other
initiatives we have taken up. A comment from the Leader of the Liberal Party
recently was that we had accepted only seven of the 39 recommendations. In
fact, the correct information was—I like to make sure that the correct
information gets out—that seven of those recommendations had been
actioned and we are working on the rest. It is important to get the facts
right, member.
Ms L. Mettam interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : I know they do not mean a lot to
people over there, but they are really important.
Last week, the Leader of the Liberal Party announced her own
plan to streamline approvals. When she launched this plan, she accused the
government of being paralysed by ideology. Let us face it. It rings true, does
it not, folks? I am paralysed! I cannot do a thing! I do not want to change
anything. The Treasurer, who is key to these reform processes, is a very shy
and retiring type. She seldom speaks up. She is reluctant to speak her mind. We
all know that about her. We are all absolutely paralysed! What a load of old
tripe. Seriously, what a line to use—paralysed by ideology—when
a government has never done more or taken more action to have more fundamental
reform of the system than ever before.
Ms L. Mettam interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : I will get back to the member. This is
my opportunity to speak. She will get her time. The Liberal Party had some announcements to make. Listening to them was
almost word for word the initiatives we are currently engaged in. In
fact, the Leader of the Liberal Party on the radio, I think with Gary Adshead,
admitted she was taking all the information from the Vogel–McFerran
assessment. There we go. We are paralysed by ideology, but the Liberal Party is
copying its homework from us. The member talked about enabling parallel
approvals, removing appeals for projects
that the EPA chose not to assess and the strict conditions on stop-the-clock
provisions . This is all good stuff, member, because it is our stuff!
These are all components of this government's plan. We announced these
things in December. We are delivering them now.
I could go on, and I will. I must
give the Leader of the Liberal Party some credit because she came up with a policy
that was not a Labor policy. In fact, it came out of a previous Liberal government.
It was for deemed approvals. Going back 15 years, when I think Troy Buswell was
Treasurer, he got a recommendation that deemed approvals should be part of the
reform process. It is a 15-year-old policy, and the member is finally on board,
but at the time she did not tell the public that, back in the previous
government, the Liberal government rejected that reform. It was rejected. Now she is finally on board because
we have taken it up. That is very good to see. If members opposite want
to talk about paralysed ideology, I think they should look no further than the
Liberal Party's energy policy and
its desire to continue using coal-fired power for generation of electricity in
this state. The other big announcement recently from our friends across
the way was that they are going to continue with coal way past 2030, until some
future time when I guess nuclear becomes a possibility. That is their plan.
Ms L. Mettam interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : No. The
member said the Liberal Party will continue to use coal well past 2030. The
member needs to know a couple of things. There is not an easy option here. The
reserves of coal are limited, so it will continue to be difficult after 2030 to
have a reliable supply of coal. The other thing is that the coal-fired generation
in Collie is quite old. If we did not have renewables and we were not making
these changes, any government of the day would have a responsibility to either
spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a major upgrade or invest in new
coal-fired generation in Collie. If coal continues past 2030, the Liberal Party
will be putting the state at risk because that is old kit. If the Liberal Party
is going to do this, which is part of its plan, where has it specified the
hundreds of millions of dollars needed to build new coal-fired power?
Ms L. Mettam interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : If the
Liberal Party wants to go past 2030, this is the reality it has to face. The
other point I want to make is that the people of Collie deserve certainty.
Businesses deserve certainty and clarity. They need a timeline. They need a signal
to invest. What we have from over the way is confusion.
Several members interjected.
Mr R.R. WHITBY : We have
confusion. It is a crying shame.
Point of Order
Mr R.S. LOVE : I have a point
of order.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order! Points of
order are heard in silence.
Mr R.S. LOVE : I understood
the question was around the EPA approvals processes. Now we are discussing coal
generation and investing in power plants at some point in the future. I would
ask that the minister be brought back to the matter at hand in the question.
The SPEAKER : There have been
some interjections, which may have extended the minister's answer, but
I hope he might conclude his answer briefly.
Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr R.R. WHITBY : Thank you,
Speaker. I want to make the point that the people of Collie deserve clarity.
They need certainty. This is not good for
the community down there. The opposition talks about approvals and, yes, reform of the approvals process is absolutely correct and right. It is what we
embarked on, but any new, big coal-fired power
plant is going to require environmental approvals. This is what the alternative
energy policy of this state looks like—uncertainty, massive
costs and a requirement to approve, (a), coal-fired power and then, (b),
nuclear power, which has its own set of huge hurdles and constraints. I will
just leave that there with the Leader of the Opposition. Thank you.
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.