A parliamentary question addresses the Esperance lead contamination scandal, inquiring about cleanup costs, budget allocation, and compensation for affected residents. The government has spent $7.5M, expects to spend $2M more, and is preparing a compensation scheme.

AnsweredQoN 236Legislative Council
Asked
19 March 2008
Portfolio
Planning and Infrastructure

QuestionView source ↗

ESPERANCE LEAD CONTAMINATION
I refer to the lead contamination scandal in Esperance, as described and identified in the report of the “Inquiry into the Cause and Extent of Lead Pollution in the Esperance Area” released in September 2007. (1) How much has the state government spent to date in cleaning up the lead contamination at Esperance? (2) How much has the government set aside in the next budget for ongoing contamination clean-up costs at Esperance? (3) Is the state government intending to compensate the residents of Esperance who have been adversely affected by the lead contamination at Esperance? (4) If no to (3), why not? Hon ADELE FARINA

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) The state government has so far spent more than $7.5 million on the clean-up in response to the lead contamination in Esperance and expects to spend at least a further $2 million in clean-up operations. (2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
(1) How much has the state government spent to date in cleaning up the lead contamination at Esperance? (2) How much has the government set aside in the next budget for ongoing contamination clean-up costs at Esperance? (3) Is the state government intending to compensate the residents of Esperance who have been adversely affected by the lead contamination at Esperance? (4) If no to (3), why not? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) The state government has so far spent more than $7.5 million on the clean-up in response to the lead contamination in Esperance and expects to spend at least a further $2 million in clean-up operations. (2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
(2) How much has the government set aside in the next budget for ongoing contamination clean-up costs at Esperance? (3) Is the state government intending to compensate the residents of Esperance who have been adversely affected by the lead contamination at Esperance? (4) If no to (3), why not? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) The state government has so far spent more than $7.5 million on the clean-up in response to the lead contamination in Esperance and expects to spend at least a further $2 million in clean-up operations. (2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
(3) Is the state government intending to compensate the residents of Esperance who have been adversely affected by the lead contamination at Esperance? (4) If no to (3), why not? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) The state government has so far spent more than $7.5 million on the clean-up in response to the lead contamination in Esperance and expects to spend at least a further $2 million in clean-up operations. (2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
(4) If no to (3), why not? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) The state government has so far spent more than $7.5 million on the clean-up in response to the lead contamination in Esperance and expects to spend at least a further $2 million in clean-up operations. (2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) The state government has so far spent more than $7.5 million on the clean-up in response to the lead contamination in Esperance and expects to spend at least a further $2 million in clean-up operations. (2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) The state government has so far spent more than $7.5 million on the clean-up in response to the lead contamination in Esperance and expects to spend at least a further $2 million in clean-up operations. (2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
(1) The state government has so far spent more than $7.5 million on the clean-up in response to the lead contamination in Esperance and expects to spend at least a further $2 million in clean-up operations. (2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
(2) The budget process is ongoing. (3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
(3) The state government is currently preparing a compensation scheme for those people who might possibly develop health consequences as a result of exposure to lead contamination from the port. (4) Not applicable.
(4) Not applicable.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more