A parliamentary question seeks clarification on the consistency of proposed environmental bill changes with advice from stakeholder groups. The Minister clarifies that one group wasn't consulted and the bill differs from another group's recommendation.

AnsweredQoN 1234Legislative Council
Asked
27 November 2009
Portfolio
Environment

QuestionView source ↗

ENVIRONMENTAL STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY GROUP — ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT APPEALS PROCESSES
I refer to the advice the minister received from the environmental stakeholder advisory group on changes to the appeals processes under the Environmental Protection Act. (1) Are the changes proposed in the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009 consistent with the advice and/or report provided to the minister by the environmental stakeholder advisory group? (2) If no to (1), what advice was provided by the group? (3) If the bill is not consistent with the advice from the stakeholder advisory group, whose advice did the minister consider? (4) Are the changes proposed in the bill consistent with the recommendations of the industry working group on approvals committee? (5) If no to (4), how do they differ? Hon DONNA FARAGHER

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
(1) Are the changes proposed in the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009 consistent with the advice and/or report provided to the minister by the environmental stakeholder advisory group? (2) If no to (1), what advice was provided by the group? (3) If the bill is not consistent with the advice from the stakeholder advisory group, whose advice did the minister consider? (4) Are the changes proposed in the bill consistent with the recommendations of the industry working group on approvals committee? (5) If no to (4), how do they differ? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
(2) If no to (1), what advice was provided by the group? (3) If the bill is not consistent with the advice from the stakeholder advisory group, whose advice did the minister consider? (4) Are the changes proposed in the bill consistent with the recommendations of the industry working group on approvals committee? (5) If no to (4), how do they differ? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
(3) If the bill is not consistent with the advice from the stakeholder advisory group, whose advice did the minister consider? (4) Are the changes proposed in the bill consistent with the recommendations of the industry working group on approvals committee? (5) If no to (4), how do they differ? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
(4) Are the changes proposed in the bill consistent with the recommendations of the industry working group on approvals committee? (5) If no to (4), how do they differ? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
(5) If no to (4), how do they differ? Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
Hon DONNA FARAGHER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
(1)-(2) The environmental stakeholder advisory group was not requested to provide advice or to report on the matters leading to the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 1) (Environment) Bill 2009. (3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
(3) I considered the advice of the Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority. Furthermore, all four approvals and related reform bills were developed as part of the Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability. (4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.
(4)-(5) The industry working group report to the Minister for Mines and Petroleum recommended that responsibility for the appeal process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 be transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal. This bill does not give effect to that recommendation.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more