❓ Mr. Graham questions the State Government regarding extensions granted to Rio Tinto for secondary iron ore processing. The government confirms extensions were granted due to technological and commercial unviability.
AnsweredQoN 1022Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Has any State Government Minister granted extension of time for secondary processing of iron ore for Rio Tinto?
(2) If the answer to (1) is yes -
(a) on what date was each extension granted; and
(b) for what reason was each extension granted?
(3) If the answer to (1) is no, why has Rio Tinto not further processed any iron ore?
(2) If the answer to (1) is yes -
(a) on what date was each extension granted; and
(b) for what reason was each extension granted?
(3) If the answer to (1) is no, why has Rio Tinto not further processed any iron ore?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
1 April 2003
Responded by
Minister for State Development
Response time
34 days
(b) for what reason was each extension granted?
(1) Yes. (2) (a) The dates specified in the Mount Bruce and Yandicoogina Agreements have been extended from time to time. Proposals for the HIsmelt project as agreed were submitted by 30 June 2002. The HIsmelt project will satisfy the secondary processing obligations of the Yandicoogina Agreement. The date for submission of proposals to meet steel making obligations in the Mount Bruce Agreement was extended to 31 December 2009 in July 2002. (b) The technology was not technically or commercially viable at the time. (3) N/A.
(2) (a) The dates specified in the Mount Bruce and Yandicoogina Agreements have been extended from time to time. Proposals for the HIsmelt project as agreed were submitted by 30 June 2002. The HIsmelt project will satisfy the secondary processing obligations of the Yandicoogina Agreement. The date for submission of proposals to meet steel making obligations in the Mount Bruce Agreement was extended to 31 December 2009 in July 2002. (b) The technology was not technically or commercially viable at the time. (3) N/A.
(b) The technology was not technically or commercially viable at the time. (3) N/A.
(3) N/A.
(1) Yes. (2) (a) The dates specified in the Mount Bruce and Yandicoogina Agreements have been extended from time to time. Proposals for the HIsmelt project as agreed were submitted by 30 June 2002. The HIsmelt project will satisfy the secondary processing obligations of the Yandicoogina Agreement. The date for submission of proposals to meet steel making obligations in the Mount Bruce Agreement was extended to 31 December 2009 in July 2002. (b) The technology was not technically or commercially viable at the time. (3) N/A.
(2) (a) The dates specified in the Mount Bruce and Yandicoogina Agreements have been extended from time to time. Proposals for the HIsmelt project as agreed were submitted by 30 June 2002. The HIsmelt project will satisfy the secondary processing obligations of the Yandicoogina Agreement. The date for submission of proposals to meet steel making obligations in the Mount Bruce Agreement was extended to 31 December 2009 in July 2002. (b) The technology was not technically or commercially viable at the time. (3) N/A.
(b) The technology was not technically or commercially viable at the time. (3) N/A.
(3) N/A.
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.