❓ A parliamentary question regarding the potential impact of a National Party proposal to alter state agreements with major mining companies (BHP, Rio Tinto, Chevron) and the associated sovereign risk. The Minister acknowledges concerns and emphasizes the need for cooperation with proponents for any changes.
AnsweredQoN 553Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
MINING TAX — NATIONAL PARTY PROPOSAL —
STATE AGREEMENTS
553. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON to the Minister for
State Development:
I refer to the proposal by the
Leader of the National Party to tear up state agreements relating to BHP
Billiton, Rio Tinto and Chevron, and significantly alter the terms of those
agreements.
(1) Has the minister
met with those companies; and, if so, what have they said to him about this
proposal?
(2) Is there a sovereign
risk associated with the proposal by the Leader of the National Party?
(3) What impact
will these tax changes have on the development of new iron ore projects by Rio
Tinto and BHP?
STATE AGREEMENTS
553. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON to the Minister for
State Development:
I refer to the proposal by the
Leader of the National Party to tear up state agreements relating to BHP
Billiton, Rio Tinto and Chevron, and significantly alter the terms of those
agreements.
(1) Has the minister
met with those companies; and, if so, what have they said to him about this
proposal?
(2) Is there a sovereign
risk associated with the proposal by the Leader of the National Party?
(3) What impact
will these tax changes have on the development of new iron ore projects by Rio
Tinto and BHP?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3) I
thank the member for Cannington for the question. I have met with the Chamber
of Minerals and Energy on this issue, and it voiced its concerns, as the member
has heard on the radio, as well. I have not met specifically with any of the
individual companies as yet, but I will be doing so. Any change to state
agreement acts, historically and the way I would approach it, should be done by
cooperation with the proponent, who would have to agree with any change, so
that there would be no disagreement. If that was not done, there would be an
impact on sovereign risk.
thank the member for Cannington for the question. I have met with the Chamber
of Minerals and Energy on this issue, and it voiced its concerns, as the member
has heard on the radio, as well. I have not met specifically with any of the
individual companies as yet, but I will be doing so. Any change to state
agreement acts, historically and the way I would approach it, should be done by
cooperation with the proponent, who would have to agree with any change, so
that there would be no disagreement. If that was not done, there would be an
impact on sovereign risk.
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.