❓ Question on Notice regarding Portman Mining's Koolyanobbing expansion, focusing on Indigenous heritage surveys and potential omissions of heritage sites. The Minister's response details the EPA's reliance on the DIA's advice, which found insufficient evidence to classify the areas as Aboriginal sites.
AnsweredQoN 552Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Portman Mining Koolyanobbing expansion, and ask -
(1) Is the Minister aware that Australian Interaction Consultants (AIC) conducted three Indigenous heritage surveys for Portman Mining prior to Philip Clark being engaged by the company, and is the Minister in possession of these documents?
(2) Is the Minister aware that these documents contain information about heritage sites within the project area which were omitted from the final reports provided to the Department by Portman and Clark?
(3) Will the Minister withhold a decision on this project until such time as the Aboriginal Cultural Materials Committee has had time to determine whether or not Portman has accurately accounted for its commitments under the
Aboriginal Heritage Act
1972?
(4) Will the Minister ensure that the Department inquires into whether or not Portman has accurately reported on its Aboriginal heritage commitments to the EPA?
(1) Is the Minister aware that Australian Interaction Consultants (AIC) conducted three Indigenous heritage surveys for Portman Mining prior to Philip Clark being engaged by the company, and is the Minister in possession of these documents?
(2) Is the Minister aware that these documents contain information about heritage sites within the project area which were omitted from the final reports provided to the Department by Portman and Clark?
(3) Will the Minister withhold a decision on this project until such time as the Aboriginal Cultural Materials Committee has had time to determine whether or not Portman has accurately accounted for its commitments under the
Aboriginal Heritage Act
1972?
(4) Will the Minister ensure that the Department inquires into whether or not Portman has accurately reported on its Aboriginal heritage commitments to the EPA?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
10 April 2003
Responded by
Minister for Housing and Works representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage
Response time
28 days
(1) Yes. The documents referred to were provided to the Acting Appeals Convenor as part of the Appeals investigation relating to the Environmental Protection Authority’s report and recommendations on the proposed Koolyanobbing Iron Ore expansion, and returned to the author.
(2) See answer to Question 4.
(3) Appeals related to the proposal were determined on 1 April 2003.
(4) In relation to Aboriginal heritage, the Environmental Protection Authority relied on advice from the Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA) in considering this factor. The DIA initially advised the EPA that there were a number of conflicting opinions and issues relating to Aboriginal heritage and culture at Mt Jackson and Windarling that required investigation. After completing the investigations the DIA notified the EPA that there was insufficient information available to determine that Mt Jackson and Windarling are Aboriginal sites within the meaning of the
Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972
. On this basis, the EPA did not consider Aboriginal culture and heritage to be a relevant environmental factor.
Further advice was sought from the DIA during the appeals process in relation to the specific information provided by one appellant in relation to this issue. The DIA advised that it remained of the view that no information sufficient to commence a registration process for Aboriginal heritage sites in accordance with Departmental guidelines had been provided in relation to ethnographic and archaeological sites at Windarling or Mt Jackson. On the basis of information provided to the DIA, it advised that there was no requirement for the proponent to lodge a section 18 application under the
Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972
before it commences work at Mt Jackson or Windarling, although the proponent has committed to undertaking further Aboriginal site surveys and making a section 18 application should these surveys identify any Aboriginal sites. The DIA further advised that if sufficient information came to light that sites were being impacted on by the proposal, appropriate action would be considered.
The Minister for Environment and Heritage wrote to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs on 1 April 2003 and advised him of the above.
(2) See answer to Question 4.
(3) Appeals related to the proposal were determined on 1 April 2003.
(4) In relation to Aboriginal heritage, the Environmental Protection Authority relied on advice from the Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA) in considering this factor. The DIA initially advised the EPA that there were a number of conflicting opinions and issues relating to Aboriginal heritage and culture at Mt Jackson and Windarling that required investigation. After completing the investigations the DIA notified the EPA that there was insufficient information available to determine that Mt Jackson and Windarling are Aboriginal sites within the meaning of the
Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972
. On this basis, the EPA did not consider Aboriginal culture and heritage to be a relevant environmental factor.
Further advice was sought from the DIA during the appeals process in relation to the specific information provided by one appellant in relation to this issue. The DIA advised that it remained of the view that no information sufficient to commence a registration process for Aboriginal heritage sites in accordance with Departmental guidelines had been provided in relation to ethnographic and archaeological sites at Windarling or Mt Jackson. On the basis of information provided to the DIA, it advised that there was no requirement for the proponent to lodge a section 18 application under the
Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972
before it commences work at Mt Jackson or Windarling, although the proponent has committed to undertaking further Aboriginal site surveys and making a section 18 application should these surveys identify any Aboriginal sites. The DIA further advised that if sufficient information came to light that sites were being impacted on by the proposal, appropriate action would be considered.
The Minister for Environment and Heritage wrote to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs on 1 April 2003 and advised him of the above.
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.