❓ The Treasurer outlines the government's plan for sustainable development in the West Kimberley, focusing on gas resource development in the Browse Basin, emphasizing collaboration with the Commonwealth, Indigenous consultation, and environmental protection through a single common-user hub.
AnsweredQoN 143Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
WEST KIMBERLEY — SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the state government’s plan for sustainable development in the west Kimberley? Mr E.S. RIPPER
Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the state government’s plan for sustainable development in the west Kimberley? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
Indeed, I can. Last week the federal Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Peter Garrett, members of the state government’s Northern Development Taskforce and I went to Broome to talk to groups with an interest in the development of gas resources in Browse Basin off the Kimberley coast. We spoke to a number of people, including the traditional owners, senior representatives of the Kimberley Land Council, representatives from the Shire of Derby, community representatives and people from a range of non-government environmental organisations. The trip was very productive. It certainly helped reaffirm the close partnership that we have with the commonwealth government on this matter. It confirmed for me the goodwill that all the stakeholders in the west Kimberley are showing towards the processes that we have established for a decision on this issue. We have a common goal with the commonwealth—and I believe with the people of the west Kimberley—to ensure that no development will take place without the informed consent of the traditional owners and their substantial participation in the economic proceeds of the project. Mr C.J. Barnett : Is it a veto? Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: Indeed, I can. Last week the federal Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Peter Garrett, members of the state government’s Northern Development Taskforce and I went to Broome to talk to groups with an interest in the development of gas resources in Browse Basin off the Kimberley coast. We spoke to a number of people, including the traditional owners, senior representatives of the Kimberley Land Council, representatives from the Shire of Derby, community representatives and people from a range of non-government environmental organisations. The trip was very productive. It certainly helped reaffirm the close partnership that we have with the commonwealth government on this matter. It confirmed for me the goodwill that all the stakeholders in the west Kimberley are showing towards the processes that we have established for a decision on this issue. We have a common goal with the commonwealth—and I believe with the people of the west Kimberley—to ensure that no development will take place without the informed consent of the traditional owners and their substantial participation in the economic proceeds of the project. Mr C.J. Barnett : Is it a veto? Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Indeed, I can. Last week the federal Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Peter Garrett, members of the state government’s Northern Development Taskforce and I went to Broome to talk to groups with an interest in the development of gas resources in Browse Basin off the Kimberley coast. We spoke to a number of people, including the traditional owners, senior representatives of the Kimberley Land Council, representatives from the Shire of Derby, community representatives and people from a range of non-government environmental organisations. The trip was very productive. It certainly helped reaffirm the close partnership that we have with the commonwealth government on this matter. It confirmed for me the goodwill that all the stakeholders in the west Kimberley are showing towards the processes that we have established for a decision on this issue. We have a common goal with the commonwealth—and I believe with the people of the west Kimberley—to ensure that no development will take place without the informed consent of the traditional owners and their substantial participation in the economic proceeds of the project. Mr C.J. Barnett : Is it a veto? Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr C.J. Barnett : Is it a veto? Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: Indeed, I can. Last week the federal Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Peter Garrett, members of the state government’s Northern Development Taskforce and I went to Broome to talk to groups with an interest in the development of gas resources in Browse Basin off the Kimberley coast. We spoke to a number of people, including the traditional owners, senior representatives of the Kimberley Land Council, representatives from the Shire of Derby, community representatives and people from a range of non-government environmental organisations. The trip was very productive. It certainly helped reaffirm the close partnership that we have with the commonwealth government on this matter. It confirmed for me the goodwill that all the stakeholders in the west Kimberley are showing towards the processes that we have established for a decision on this issue. We have a common goal with the commonwealth—and I believe with the people of the west Kimberley—to ensure that no development will take place without the informed consent of the traditional owners and their substantial participation in the economic proceeds of the project. Mr C.J. Barnett : Is it a veto? Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Indeed, I can. Last week the federal Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Peter Garrett, members of the state government’s Northern Development Taskforce and I went to Broome to talk to groups with an interest in the development of gas resources in Browse Basin off the Kimberley coast. We spoke to a number of people, including the traditional owners, senior representatives of the Kimberley Land Council, representatives from the Shire of Derby, community representatives and people from a range of non-government environmental organisations. The trip was very productive. It certainly helped reaffirm the close partnership that we have with the commonwealth government on this matter. It confirmed for me the goodwill that all the stakeholders in the west Kimberley are showing towards the processes that we have established for a decision on this issue. We have a common goal with the commonwealth—and I believe with the people of the west Kimberley—to ensure that no development will take place without the informed consent of the traditional owners and their substantial participation in the economic proceeds of the project. Mr C.J. Barnett : Is it a veto? Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr C.J. Barnett : Is it a veto? Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Cottesloe needs to recognise that in most cases the land in question is owned exclusively by the Indigenous people. When a project is put on someone else’s land, that person needs to be given some benefits from the use of the land in which he or she has an interest. I believe that our process will deliver a single common-user hub that will allow development of the Browse Basin gas, provide those benefits for Indigenous people from a project that has their consent, and preserve the environmental and heritage values of the pristine west Kimberley. Contrary to an unsourced report in The Australian newspaper, our plans for the preferred model of such a hub have not yet been determined. We will be consulting extensively before any such model is finalised, and we will be seeking to ensure that there is no unfair commercial advantage for one proponent over another. During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
During my meetings with the Kimberley Land Council we developed a framework for principles of negotiation to ensure that traditional owners are comprehensively informed and consulted. We have committed to supporting the KLC prepare an archive of traditional knowledge as part of the upcoming strategic assessment of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we are conducting a strategic assessment under the commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and under our Environmental Protection Act to identify the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the region. Together with the commonwealth, we will protect these values. As well as the development of the Browse Basin gas resources, there will be a conservation outcome in the west Kimberley. One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
One of the things that struck me from my conversations with the various stakeholders is the complexity of the different interests and viewpoints amongst the people of the west Kimberley. We are engaged in a complex exercise. The Northern Development Taskforce has done a lot of good work to identify a suitable site for a single common-user gas hub. I expect it to give me a shortlist of sites by June. We are making very good progress on a very complex issue towards an outcome that will not only provide significant benefits for Indigenous people, but also reduce the red tape for industry and streamline the approvals processes while protecting the environment and the unique cultural and heritage values of the Kimberley. This relies on the approach of a single common-user hub. I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
I asked the Leader of the Opposition whether the opposition would commit itself to this approach. The Leader of the Opposition would not deny that he supports ad hoc, out-of-control development of multiple liquefied natural gas sites up and down the west Kimberley coast. I ask him again whether he will commit the opposition to a single common-user hub. Will he do that? He will not. We have a good plan in the west Kimberley. We have a good process — Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
The SPEAKER : I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
Mr E.S. RIPPER : It is typical of an immature and juvenile opposition that it has only knee-jerk reactions to the last approach it had from a vested interest group. Where is its plan and its approach for the development and protection of this highly sensitive region on an issue where the development of these gas resources is not only important for the west Kimberley, but also vitally important for the state, the nation and, arguably, the world?
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.