A WA parliamentary question probes the impact of the Labor government's moratorium on hydraulic fracturing on petroleum exploration permits and special prospecting authorities, focusing on affected applicants, obligations, work programs, native title negotiations, compensation, and the rationale behind the policy.

AnsweredQoN 5206Legislative Assembly
Asked
12 June 2019
Portfolio
Mines and Petroleum; Energy; Industrial Relations

QuestionView source ↗

(1) Can the Minister advise how many petroleum Exploration Permit (EP) applications and Special Prospecting Authority (SPA) holders and applicants have been affected by the Labor government's moratorium on hydraulic fracture stimulation on onshore areas of the state and provide details of their location and the name of applicant and/or holder? (2) Can the Minister advise how many petroleum EP applications and SPA holders and applicants are not affected by the Labor government's moratorium because they are in the areas where hydraulic fracture stimulation on onshore areas of the state will still be allowed and provide the details of their location and name of applicant and/or holder? (3) What are the obligations and implications of the moratorium on hydraulic stimulation for those companies and individuals that have pending applications for petroleum EPs and active SPA holders outside the allowable area? (4) Can the Minister advise for each of the pending petroleum EP applications and SPAs what work programs have been undertaken by the applicants and over what timeframe? (5) Can the Minister advise for each of the pending petroleum EP applications and SPAs what outstanding work programs and approvals were still to be undertaken by the applicants to achieve Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS) approval? (6) How many, and which of, the petroleum EP applications and SPA holders and applicants affected by the Labor government's moratorium were still working through the "Right to Negotiate" provisions of the Native Title Act? (7) Will the Labor government consider compensation to any of the companies or individuals for loss of capital expenditure and time expended over several years in developing their applications for EPs through consultation with DMIRS? (8) Can the Minister advise if the Independent Scientific Inquiry into Hydraulic Fracture Stimulation in Western Australia made any recommendation in regard to excluding any areas of the State from hydraulic stimulation? (9) Why did the Labor government only include current petroleum; exploration permits, retention leases and petroleum licences as being exempt form their moratorium on hydraulic fracturing and exclude pending petroleum EPs and SPA holders?

AnswerView source ↗

Answered
6 August 2019
Responded by
Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Energy; Industrial Relations
Response time
8 days
(1)  21 petroleum Exploration Permit (EP) applications, 4 SPA applications see tabled paper ]
(2)  None
(3)  Proponents will not be able to use the technique known as hydraulic fracturing when conducting exploration or recovery operations.
(4)  No work programs have been undertaken in relation to the 21 EP Applications or 4 SPA applications.
(5)  All 21 EP applications are required to complete the future act right to negotiate process under the Native Title Act 1993 .
4 SPA applications:
(6)  See answer 5.
(7)  No
(8)  Yes
(9)  The Government’s decision was a policy decision based on the rights of the holders of existing exploration permits, retention leases and production licences. These rights do not extend to applicants.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more