❓ A Member of Parliament questions the Environment Minister regarding the Pioneer Concrete quarry at Red Hill, specifically about restrictions on an independent consultant's review and the department's handling of the issue. The Minister responds by outlining actions taken, including directing the EPA to conduct a review.
AnsweredQoN 97Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Almost a year ago, I presented a grievance to the minister on the issue of Tony Elwood and his problems with the Pioneer Concrete (WA) Pty Ltd quarry at Red Hill. There has still been no resolution of this issue even though the department’s independent consultant concluded that Pioneer Concrete has not demonstrated compliance with its own commitments, that the department’s conclusion on visual amenity is wrong, and that the department’s chief executive officer may have arrived at a finding inconsistent with the evidence. (1) Why were the independent consultant’s terms of reference restricted so as to exclude two key issues; firstly, whether the quarry is operating outside its approved footprint; and, secondly, whether the original environmental impact report in 1991 was wrong in its statement about the quarry’s visual impact? (2) Consistent with the findings of the independent reviewer, will the minister now instruct her department to admit that it has not told the truth to Mr Elwood and that it must act either to force Pioneer Concrete’s compliance with its licence conditions or to initiate prosecution against the company? Dr J.M. EDWARDS
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
(1) Why were the independent consultant’s terms of reference restricted so as to exclude two key issues; firstly, whether the quarry is operating outside its approved footprint; and, secondly, whether the original environmental impact report in 1991 was wrong in its statement about the quarry’s visual impact? (2) Consistent with the findings of the independent reviewer, will the minister now instruct her department to admit that it has not told the truth to Mr Elwood and that it must act either to force Pioneer Concrete’s compliance with its licence conditions or to initiate prosecution against the company? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
(2) Consistent with the findings of the independent reviewer, will the minister now instruct her department to admit that it has not told the truth to Mr Elwood and that it must act either to force Pioneer Concrete’s compliance with its licence conditions or to initiate prosecution against the company? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
(1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
(1) Why were the independent consultant’s terms of reference restricted so as to exclude two key issues; firstly, whether the quarry is operating outside its approved footprint; and, secondly, whether the original environmental impact report in 1991 was wrong in its statement about the quarry’s visual impact? (2) Consistent with the findings of the independent reviewer, will the minister now instruct her department to admit that it has not told the truth to Mr Elwood and that it must act either to force Pioneer Concrete’s compliance with its licence conditions or to initiate prosecution against the company? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
(2) Consistent with the findings of the independent reviewer, will the minister now instruct her department to admit that it has not told the truth to Mr Elwood and that it must act either to force Pioneer Concrete’s compliance with its licence conditions or to initiate prosecution against the company? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
(1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. Given that we are in Albany and we have such a full gallery, it is worthwhile pointing out, in all fairness to the member and to give him some due credit, that he first raised this issue as a grievance, which caused me, as minister, to revisit the matter. As a result, I asked the department to get an independent reviewer to examine the environmental approval and the conditions attached to it. I am very happy with the terms of reference of that independent study. I received that independent report in January and read it in some detail. As the member rightfully points out, the report stated that the company had some difficulties abiding by condition 22 of the environmental approval and that, based on that fact, there were some inaccuracies and previous decisions may not have been totally grounded on the full facts. As a result, I directed the Environmental Protection Authority to carry out a section 46 review of the conditions attached to this project, which was advertised in The West Australian about a month ago and is now under way. This is a good example of a member raising a grievance, a minister listening, and an independent report being carried out. The independent report shows the problem and I have now directed the EPA, which is undertaking a section 46 review of those ministerial conditions.
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.