❓ Hon Tom Stephens questions the Minister for Mines on the delay in deciding on Iluka Resources' sandmining lease application near Mundijong. The Minister deflects, criticising the Labor Party's stance on environmental assessments and citing workload.
AnsweredQoN 477Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the recommendations of the mining warden of 23 December 1999 concerning the application by Iluka Resources Limited for sandmining leases around the Mundijong town site and ask - (1) Has the minister made a decision on those applications? (2) If not, how does the minister account for the 11-month delay, and will he tell the House when a decision will be made? (3) If yes, what is the decision? Hon N.F. MOORE
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
(1) Has the minister made a decision on those applications? (2) If not, how does the minister account for the 11-month delay, and will he tell the House when a decision will be made? (3) If yes, what is the decision? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
(2) If not, how does the minister account for the 11-month delay, and will he tell the House when a decision will be made? (3) If yes, what is the decision? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
(3) If yes, what is the decision? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
(1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
(1) Has the minister made a decision on those applications? (2) If not, how does the minister account for the 11-month delay, and will he tell the House when a decision will be made? (3) If yes, what is the decision? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
(2) If not, how does the minister account for the 11-month delay, and will he tell the House when a decision will be made? (3) If yes, what is the decision? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
(3) If yes, what is the decision? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon N.F. MOORE replied: (1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
(1)-(3) For the benefit of members who might be interested in this subject, the company, Iluka Resources, applied for a mining lease for an area of land, adjacent to the Mundijong town site, that is currently under an exploration licence. For the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, the exploration licence was granted by the predecessor of this Government, a Labor Government. That licence gave the company an expectation that it could carry out exploration in that part of Western Australia. The company has now delineated an area of land that it wants to turn into a mining lease and the warden has made some decisions on that, which relate to environmental issues. The matter has now come to the Minister for Mines who will determine whether to grant the mining lease and, if so, whether conditions will be attached to it. It is interesting that the Labor Party is now arguing that the Minister for Mines should abide by the environmental conditions set down by the warden when the Opposition knows that the granting of a mining lease is always subject to environmental approval. The lease simply gives the operator access to a piece of ground - it gives it tenure - but it does not give the operator a right to mine. If an operator wants to mine, it must lodge a mining plan, which is assessed by the state mining engineer and the Environmental Protection Authority, if required. Environmental decisions are made at that point. In this case the Labor Party candidate is saying that I should abide by the warden’s environmental decisions. In other words, the Labor Party is saying that the warden should make the environmental assessment and not the EPA. I am interested to know the Labor Party’s position on this matter. Whenever I ask, I receive a conflicting point of view. The Opposition spokesman on environment says the assessment should be done by the EPA, whereas the candidate says it should be done by the warden. The Labor Party is confused on this issue. I am required to read and assess documentation on this issue. That is a result of a number of decisions and determinations by the Supreme Court on the use of ministerial discretion. I am happy to show the member how much paperwork I have to read; then he will know why it is taking me so long. Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon Tom Stephens: Eleven months. Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon N.F. MOORE: The department had the documentation up until a month ago and gave me an assessment of what it thinks should be done. This issue raises an interesting question of policy. The Labor Party is seeking to be a policy-free zone. Nobody knows what it stands for - this is the old Bracks trick - therefore, it cannot be accused of taking sides. The Labor Party must tell the public its views on this matter. If it thinks the warden should make decisions on environmental issues before any mining plan is put forward, it should say that to the public and to the mining industry. If, however, it believes existing processes should remain in place - that mining leases be granted subject to environmental assessment - it should say that. The Government would like to know the Opposition’s position on this issue. Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon Tom Stephens: When will you make your decision? Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
Hon N.F. MOORE: I will make my decision as soon as I have read the documentation. I am anxious to make this decision. It is not being held up for any reason other than the enormous amount of reading involved. The Labor Party must make its position known before the election.
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.