❓ A WA parliamentary question scrutinises the environmental oversight of the White Foil Project, specifically questioning the justification and legal basis for directives issued by a Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources inspector regarding hypersaline water management, waste disposal, and surface water drainage. The Minister's response defends the inspector's actions as good environmental practice, enforcement of prior commitments, and within their legislative authority.
AnsweredQoN 1125Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to a letter which I understand is dated May 2 2002 titled ‘Site Inspection of White Foil Project’, addressed to Mines and Resources Australia Ltd signed by Campbell Hawks, Environmental Inspector from the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources -
(1) Can the Minister explain why the Department was justified and very concerned to state ‘The Dams surrounding the reinjection bores are now holding holding quantities of hypersaline water. These structures and the surrounding vegetation require regular inspection to ensure that seepage is not occurring and impacting on the surrounding vegetation’?
(2) If no to (1) why not?
(3) Can the Minister explain why the department is extremely concerned to direct Mines and Resources Australia Ltd stating ‘These structures and the surrounding vegetation require regular inspection to ensure that seepage is not occurring and impacting on the surrounding vegetation’ given that it is my understanding the dams only contain hypersaline water, with the underlying groundwater being hypersaline water, the general environment being very saline and the surrounding environment is predominantly salt lake terrain with little or no vegetation?
(4) If no to (3) why not?
(5) Can the Minister state and quote the specific section of the
Mining Act
, Regulations or relevant legislation in which Mr Campbell Hawks has the legislative authority to direct and state ‘These structures and the surrounding vegetation require regular inspection to ensure that seepage is not occurring and impacting on the surrounding vegetation’?
(6) If no to (5) why not?
(7) Can the Minister explain why the Department was justified and concerned to state ‘The waste disposal site requires regular backfilling to prevent dispersal from wind and feral animals?
(8) If no to (7) why not?
(9) Can the Minister state and quote the specific section of the
Mining Act
, Regulations or relevant legislation in which Mr Campbell Hawks has the legislative authority to direct and state ‘The waste disposal site requires regular backfilling to prevent dispersal from wind and feral animals’?
(10) If no to (9) why not?
(11) Can the Minister explain the justification as to why Mr Campbell Hawks directed the company to ‘review surface water drainage across the site to ensure that inundation of vegetation in minimal’?
(12) If no to (11) why not?
(13) Can the Minister state and quote the specific section of the
Mining Act
, Regulations or relevant legislation in which Mr Campbell Hawks has the legislative authority to direct and state ‘Please review surface water drainage across the site to ensure that inundation of vegetation in minimal’?
(14) If no to (13) why not?
(1) Can the Minister explain why the Department was justified and very concerned to state ‘The Dams surrounding the reinjection bores are now holding holding quantities of hypersaline water. These structures and the surrounding vegetation require regular inspection to ensure that seepage is not occurring and impacting on the surrounding vegetation’?
(2) If no to (1) why not?
(3) Can the Minister explain why the department is extremely concerned to direct Mines and Resources Australia Ltd stating ‘These structures and the surrounding vegetation require regular inspection to ensure that seepage is not occurring and impacting on the surrounding vegetation’ given that it is my understanding the dams only contain hypersaline water, with the underlying groundwater being hypersaline water, the general environment being very saline and the surrounding environment is predominantly salt lake terrain with little or no vegetation?
(4) If no to (3) why not?
(5) Can the Minister state and quote the specific section of the
Mining Act
, Regulations or relevant legislation in which Mr Campbell Hawks has the legislative authority to direct and state ‘These structures and the surrounding vegetation require regular inspection to ensure that seepage is not occurring and impacting on the surrounding vegetation’?
(6) If no to (5) why not?
(7) Can the Minister explain why the Department was justified and concerned to state ‘The waste disposal site requires regular backfilling to prevent dispersal from wind and feral animals?
(8) If no to (7) why not?
(9) Can the Minister state and quote the specific section of the
Mining Act
, Regulations or relevant legislation in which Mr Campbell Hawks has the legislative authority to direct and state ‘The waste disposal site requires regular backfilling to prevent dispersal from wind and feral animals’?
(10) If no to (9) why not?
(11) Can the Minister explain the justification as to why Mr Campbell Hawks directed the company to ‘review surface water drainage across the site to ensure that inundation of vegetation in minimal’?
(12) If no to (11) why not?
(13) Can the Minister state and quote the specific section of the
Mining Act
, Regulations or relevant legislation in which Mr Campbell Hawks has the legislative authority to direct and state ‘Please review surface water drainage across the site to ensure that inundation of vegetation in minimal’?
(14) If no to (13) why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
16 September 2003
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for State Development
Response time
32 days
(1) It is good environmental practice to inspect containment structures such as dams surrounding reinjection bores to ensure their integrity. (2) Not Applicable. (3) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “very concerned” in relation to this particular matter, as inferred in the question. The inspector made an observation and drew the attention of the Registered Manager to the appropriate management regime. (4) Not Applicable. (5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(2) Not Applicable. (3) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “very concerned” in relation to this particular matter, as inferred in the question. The inspector made an observation and drew the attention of the Registered Manager to the appropriate management regime. (4) Not Applicable. (5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(3) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “very concerned” in relation to this particular matter, as inferred in the question. The inspector made an observation and drew the attention of the Registered Manager to the appropriate management regime. (4) Not Applicable. (5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(4) Not Applicable. (5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(14) Not Applicable.
(2) Not Applicable. (3) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “very concerned” in relation to this particular matter, as inferred in the question. The inspector made an observation and drew the attention of the Registered Manager to the appropriate management regime. (4) Not Applicable. (5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(3) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “very concerned” in relation to this particular matter, as inferred in the question. The inspector made an observation and drew the attention of the Registered Manager to the appropriate management regime. (4) Not Applicable. (5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(4) Not Applicable. (5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(5) Yes - Mr Hawks was appointed as an Inspector under Section 11 of the Mining Act 1978 to carry out the duties and exercise the powers set out in Part VI A of the Mining Regulations 1981. (6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(6) Not Applicable. (7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(7) The inspector did not state in the letter he was “concerned” in relation to this matter. The inspector drew the matter to the attention of the Registered Manager. (8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(8) Not Applicable. (9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(9) See question (7). If a direction were to be given, powers exist to do this as stated in (5) above. (10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(10) Not Applicable. (11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(11) The Inspector was enforcing commitments made by Mines and Resources Australia in their Notice of Intent and imposed as a condition of their approval. (12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(12) Not Applicable. (13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(13) See answer to Question 5. (14) Not Applicable.
(14) Not Applicable.
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.