Hon Lynn MacLaren questions the Minister for Environment regarding the revocation of environmental protection policies, inquiring about their effectiveness, the rationale behind their dismissal as symbolic, and whether the revocation is a concession to farming groups. The Minister denies the revocation is a concession.

AnsweredQoN 1392Legislative Council
Asked
26 November 2015
Portfolio
Environment

QuestionView source ↗

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION POLICIES
1392. Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the minister
representing the Minister for Environment:
(1) Will the
minister confirm that the environmental protection policies he has moved to
revoke had the force of law and could have been very effective in controlling
nutrient export, fertiliser application and protection of buffers had the
government chosen to use these policies?
(2) If yes to
(1), can the minister please explain why he yesterday described the
environmental protection policies as matters of symbolism and not substance?
(3) Is the
revocation of these environmental protection policies a concession to farming
groups, for example, in Gingin and Harvey?

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of the question.
(1) Although
the environmental protection policies were statutory policies prepared under
the Environmental Protection Act 1986, the Environmental Protection Authority
advised the minister that the policies were generally not effective in
achieving their objectives and that there are other regulatory mechanisms that
afford equal or greater protection to those parts of the environment covered by
the policies.
(2) Not applicable.
(3) No.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more