❓ Question regarding a potentially misleading answer given by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure concerning the granting of freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation, which the Minister clarifies was due to a change in the land holding authority.
AnsweredQoN 127Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
How does the minister justify the answer given yesterday to question 105, which was in part - (1) Can the minister confirm that - . . . (b) the Department for Planning and Infrastructure is proposing to grant freehold title over Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation? The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA
AnswerView source ↗
Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(1) Can the minister confirm that - . . . (b) the Department for Planning and Infrastructure is proposing to grant freehold title over Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation? The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
. . . (b) the Department for Planning and Infrastructure is proposing to grant freehold title over Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation? The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(b) the Department for Planning and Infrastructure is proposing to grant freehold title over Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation? The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(1) Can the minister confirm that - . . . (b) the Department for Planning and Infrastructure is proposing to grant freehold title over Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation? The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
. . . (b) the Department for Planning and Infrastructure is proposing to grant freehold title over Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation? The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(b) the Department for Planning and Infrastructure is proposing to grant freehold title over Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation? The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
The answer given was as follows - It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
It is not proposed to grant freehold title to the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation over Dampier location 324. In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
In fact, the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Broome Shire Council on 1 March 2005, page 31, section 9.3.3, state “Applicant: Department for Planning and Infrastructure” for “proposed freehold lot of Dampier location 324 (reserve 1517) Yardoogarra”. Also, the minutes summary includes the following wording - The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
The Department for Planning and Infrastructure requests Council’s agreement to the creation of conditional freehold tenure for Lot 324 (Reserve 1517) in favour of the Yardoogarra Aboriginal Corporation. I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
I ask - (1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(1) Are the minutes of the Broome Shire Council wrong? (2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(2) If the minutes of the Broome Shire Council are not wrong, why did the Department for Planning and Infrastructure give this house a misleading answer? (3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(3) What were the actual discussions that occurred between the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Broome Shire Council on this issue? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
Mr President, you will be relieved to know that the answer is shorter than the question. I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(1)-(2) The minutes reflect the information available to the council at 1 March 2005. Subsequent to that council meeting, the Kimberley Land Council advised the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 17 March 2005 that the land holding authority would be the Rubibi Aboriginal Land, Heritage and Development Company. On 18 March 2005, the shire was advised of this change by e-mail to the director of planning. (3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
(3) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure advises that there were no discussions between DPI and the Shire of Broome on this issue. Issues were addressed by correspondence. Letters dated 11 August, 19 November and 22 December 2004 and an e-mail dated 18 March 2005 refer to this matter, and are retained on DPI files. These documents can be made available to the member.
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.