❓ The Minister for Environment and Heritage outlines the differences in the management and regulation of the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility between the current Government and the previous Opposition, highlighting increased audits and inspections under the current administration.
AnsweredQoN 428Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Could the minister please outline the considerable difference in the approach taken to the management and regulation of the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility by this Government and by the Opposition? Dr J.M. EDWARDS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for his question; it is a very pertinent and good question to ask. Mr R.F. Johnson: When under pressure. Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: I thank the member for his question; it is a very pertinent and good question to ask. Mr R.F. Johnson: When under pressure. Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
I thank the member for his question; it is a very pertinent and good question to ask. Mr R.F. Johnson: When under pressure. Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
Mr R.F. Johnson: When under pressure. Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: I thank the member for his question; it is a very pertinent and good question to ask. Mr R.F. Johnson: When under pressure. Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
I thank the member for his question; it is a very pertinent and good question to ask. Mr R.F. Johnson: When under pressure. Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
Mr R.F. Johnson: When under pressure. Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS: Well, I am enjoying it - bring it on! We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
We see with members opposite a rewriting of history and a loss of corporate memory. To give the Leader of the Opposition his due, he has admitted that during the coalition’s time in government, the Brookdale liquid waste treatment facility accepted waste outside the then Government’s approval. However, let us look at his deputy’s words. My notes on the transcript of his comments on 6PR read - “Now you’re quite right, Gary, if you go back into the dying day of the previous Government, I understand a decision was made to allow some waste to go there, but the circumstances of the time probably stacked up. I mean there are no alternatives or whatever.” According to my notes, he then went on to say - “But I don’t want to go in there and justify any previous decisions . . . As I said, I’m not in the blame game . . .” Let me set the record straight. The dying days! When were these “dying days”? These “dying days” were on 27 July 1999. The Environmental Protection Authority wrote to the member for Kingsley, the then environment minister, on 27 July 1999 stating that the liquid waste treatment plant at Forrestdale was currently operating outside its approved environmental conditions. How concerned was the then minister about this? What did she do? She wrote back a month later and said that she had received the letter and would pop it into the environmental review that was taking place which proposed its expansion. The then minister was so concerned that, as far as we can find - she did not put out a media release - there was no strategy to let the members of the community know what was going on. The minister was so concerned that she did not ask for additional audits or inspections. In the 23 months since I was informed by the EPA that wastes were going to the Brookdale site outside the ministerial approval, we have instituted 18 audits and inspections. Nine of them were undertaken by the EPA, which is the regulator of the site, under the process set up by the previous Government. Spot audits have been conducted; people did not know we were coming. There have been four audits during which, perhaps to Cleanaway’s chagrin, community representatives went on site and accompanied officers as they carried out those inspections. Five other inspections have been carried out by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Water and Rivers Commission, which looked at water issues, for example. In addition, we have ensured that the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of Western Australia, WorkSafe and the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources have also visited the site. In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
In December 2001 I announced a procedure to stop hazardous waste going to the Brookdale plant. Over the period that followed, DEP inspectors were at the gate of that site on 22 days checking the loads as they came in to ensure that they complied. In the dying days over 18 months - it was a very protracted and painful death - how many audits or inspections were conducted? One, and when was it done? It was actually done during the time of the election. I rest my case.
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.