❓ A parliamentary question addresses the cancelled Maddington waste-to-energy project, questioning government support withdrawal and EPA's assessment independence. The Minister assures EPA's competence and outlines procedures for future proposals, noting a review of waste management strategies.
AnsweredQoN 343Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the cancelled proposal to establish a cutting-edge solid waste to energy recycling facility at Maddington. The project would have been subject to the highest level of Environmental Protection Authority assessment through an environmental review at that location. (1) Is the minister confident that the EPA has the independence and technical competence to properly assess the suitability of proposed projects such as the solid waste to energy recycling facility project; and, if so, why did the Government withdraw its support for the project before the high-level assessment had been completed? (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, will the minister support whatever level of assessment is given to it by the EPA and will the minister oppose any attempt by her Government to subvert the project and hence the assessment process, as happened with the Maddington SWERF proposal? Hon TOM STEPHENS
AnswerView source ↗
(1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
(1) Is the minister confident that the EPA has the independence and technical competence to properly assess the suitability of proposed projects such as the solid waste to energy recycling facility project; and, if so, why did the Government withdraw its support for the project before the high-level assessment had been completed? (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, will the minister support whatever level of assessment is given to it by the EPA and will the minister oppose any attempt by her Government to subvert the project and hence the assessment process, as happened with the Maddington SWERF proposal? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
(2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, will the minister support whatever level of assessment is given to it by the EPA and will the minister oppose any attempt by her Government to subvert the project and hence the assessment process, as happened with the Maddington SWERF proposal? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
(1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
(2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
(1) Is the minister confident that the EPA has the independence and technical competence to properly assess the suitability of proposed projects such as the solid waste to energy recycling facility project; and, if so, why did the Government withdraw its support for the project before the high-level assessment had been completed? (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, will the minister support whatever level of assessment is given to it by the EPA and will the minister oppose any attempt by her Government to subvert the project and hence the assessment process, as happened with the Maddington SWERF proposal? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
(2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, will the minister support whatever level of assessment is given to it by the EPA and will the minister oppose any attempt by her Government to subvert the project and hence the assessment process, as happened with the Maddington SWERF proposal? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
(1) The minister is confident that the EPA has the independence and access to all appropriate technical advice to properly assess the SWERF project. The Government has asked the Waste Management Board to advise on some strategic aspects of secondary waste treatment plants and the proponent has advised that it will place the environmental review on hold until the State Government reviews the long-term arrangements for the management of waste in this State. (2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
(2) If an alternative site is identified for the SWERF, the project would be treated as a new proposal and the normal procedures required under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 would apply. That means the proponent would be required to undergo a formal assessment process by the EPA. The minister would make the decision on the level of assessment set by the EPA, should there be any appeals, and also on the EPA’s report and recommendations.
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.