❓ A parliamentary question regarding potential environmental and social impacts of the Scott River wind farm, specifically concerning acid sulphate soils, fauna collisions, and asbestos contamination. The Minister refers to the EPA's decision not to assess the proposal and emphasizes the proponent's responsibility for compliance.
AnsweredQoN 1309Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Scott River wind farm1309.Hon Rod Caddiesto
the Minister for the Environment:I refer to the
decision by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to not assess Synergy's
Scott River wind farm proposal.(1) Can the minister confirm that the EPA has
found that the proposed Scott River wind farm may have potential impacts on:(a) local terrestrial environmental quality from
disturbance of acid sulphate soils;(b) terrestrial fauna from ongoing risks of
collision with wind turbines;(c) inland waters from dewatering and disturbance
of acid sulphate soils; and(d) social surroundings from construction and
operational noise, dust and vibration, and visual amenity?(2) Can the minister guarantee that the wind
turbines to be installed by the state government at Scott River will not cause
asbestos contamination in the local environment?
the Minister for the Environment:I refer to the
decision by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to not assess Synergy's
Scott River wind farm proposal.(1) Can the minister confirm that the EPA has
found that the proposed Scott River wind farm may have potential impacts on:(a) local terrestrial environmental quality from
disturbance of acid sulphate soils;(b) terrestrial fauna from ongoing risks of
collision with wind turbines;(c) inland waters from dewatering and disturbance
of acid sulphate soils; and(d) social surroundings from construction and
operational noise, dust and vibration, and visual amenity?(2) Can the minister guarantee that the wind
turbines to be installed by the state government at Scott River will not cause
asbestos contamination in the local environment?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
11 December 2025
Response time
0 days
Hon Matthew Swinbourn replied:I thank the member
for some notice of the question.(1)–(2) In accordance with theEnvironmental Protection Act 1986, the
independent Environmental Protection Authority has determined not to assess the
proposal. I table a copy of the EPA's decision report that sets out the reasons
for this decision.(See paper911.)Hon Matthew Swinbourn:The proponent is responsible
for development and construction decisions and activities, including compliance
with relevant legislation and regulations.
Scott River wind farm
for some notice of the question.(1)–(2) In accordance with theEnvironmental Protection Act 1986, the
independent Environmental Protection Authority has determined not to assess the
proposal. I table a copy of the EPA's decision report that sets out the reasons
for this decision.(See paper911.)Hon Matthew Swinbourn:The proponent is responsible
for development and construction decisions and activities, including compliance
with relevant legislation and regulations.
Scott River wind farm
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.