❓ Hon Giz Watson questions the Minister for Mines and Petroleum about terminating LD Operations' proposed coal mine near Margaret River, citing public opposition and Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978. The Minister clarifies that the section doesn't apply as the relevant tenements were already granted, highlighting they were granted under previous Labor governments.
AnsweredQoN 570Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
LD OPERATIONS — PROPOSED COAL MINE
I refer to LD Operations’ proposal to establish a coal mine 15 kilometres north east of the Margaret River town site, and the strong public opposition to this proposal. (1) Will the minister terminate, or summarily refuse, this application based on part V, section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978, which states that the minister may — (a) by notice served on the mining registrar or the warden, as the case requires, terminate an application for a mining tenement before the mining registrar or the warden has determined, or made a recommendation in respect of, the application; or (b) refuse an application for a mining tenement, if in respect of the whole or any part of the land to which the application relates — (c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted; (2) If no to (1), why not? Hon NORMAN MOORE
I refer to LD Operations’ proposal to establish a coal mine 15 kilometres north east of the Margaret River town site, and the strong public opposition to this proposal. (1) Will the minister terminate, or summarily refuse, this application based on part V, section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978, which states that the minister may — (a) by notice served on the mining registrar or the warden, as the case requires, terminate an application for a mining tenement before the mining registrar or the warden has determined, or made a recommendation in respect of, the application; or (b) refuse an application for a mining tenement, if in respect of the whole or any part of the land to which the application relates — (c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted; (2) If no to (1), why not? Hon NORMAN MOORE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
(1) Will the minister terminate, or summarily refuse, this application based on part V, section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978, which states that the minister may — (a) by notice served on the mining registrar or the warden, as the case requires, terminate an application for a mining tenement before the mining registrar or the warden has determined, or made a recommendation in respect of, the application; or (b) refuse an application for a mining tenement, if in respect of the whole or any part of the land to which the application relates — (c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted; (2) If no to (1), why not? Hon NORMAN MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
(b) refuse an application for a mining tenement, if in respect of the whole or any part of the land to which the application relates — (c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted;
if in respect of the whole or any part of the land to which the application relates — (c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted;
(c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted;
(ii) the application should not be granted;
Hon NORMAN MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
(1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable.
(1) Will the minister terminate, or summarily refuse, this application based on part V, section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978, which states that the minister may — (a) by notice served on the mining registrar or the warden, as the case requires, terminate an application for a mining tenement before the mining registrar or the warden has determined, or made a recommendation in respect of, the application; or (b) refuse an application for a mining tenement, if in respect of the whole or any part of the land to which the application relates — (c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted; (2) If no to (1), why not? Hon NORMAN MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
(b) refuse an application for a mining tenement, if in respect of the whole or any part of the land to which the application relates — (c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted;
if in respect of the whole or any part of the land to which the application relates — (c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted;
(c) the Minister is satisfied on reasonable grounds in the public interest that — (i) the land should not be disturbed; or (ii) the application should not be granted;
(ii) the application should not be granted;
Hon NORMAN MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
(1) Section 111A(1) of the Mining Act 1978 does not apply in this case because there are no pending applications for mining tenements covered by this proposal; rather, seven previously granted mining leases are covered by this proposal, six of which were granted in 1989 and one in 1991 under the act. In addition, one exploration licence adjacent to these leases and also covered by this proposal was granted in 2006 under the act. It is interesting to note that all of these mining tenements were granted during the terms of previous state Labor governments. The Labor Party people who have a problem with this might decide to take that on board, because all the tenements had been granted by previous state Labor governments. (2) Not applicable.
(2) 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.