Dr. Honey questions the government's prioritisation of environmental protection, contrasting efforts in Beeliar with the impact of Westport on Cockburn Sound seagrass. The Premier defends the government's actions by highlighting investment in seagrass rehabilitation and fish stock enhancement.

AnsweredQoN 833Legislative Assembly
Asked
13 November 2024
Portfolio
Premier

QuestionView source ↗

WESTPORT —
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
833. Dr D.J. HONEY to the Premier:
I have a supplementary question. Why
did the government make such a major effort to protect 0.19 hectares of degraded scrub in Beeliar but apparently have no
concern about the massive impact on over 300 hectares of seagrass in
Cockburn Sound?
The SPEAKER : I was wondering
where that was going.

AnswerView source ↗

Madam Speaker—obtuse
references to Beeliar. I am not quite sure what that refers to, but it
certainly had absolutely nothing to do with the initial question. As I explained
in my original answer, we are investing in seagrass rehabilitation. We are
investing in fish stock enhancement, making sure that we can continue to be
good partners to the Cockburn Sound. We cannot revisit the past. Of course
there has been damage to Cockburn Sound as a result of past practices —
Mr D.A.E. Scaife interjected.
Mr R.H. COOK : The member for
Cockburn is quite right!
We can move forward in a way that
both protects the environment and does not put a break on our economy.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more