❓ A parliamentary question addresses concerns about lead pollution in Esperance, specifically regarding the port's environmental license and community consultation. The Minister acknowledges a failing on the part of the port regarding community consultation and apologizes.
AnsweredQoN 150Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ESPERANCE LEAD POLLUTION
Given the grave concern in Esperance about lead levels and the minister’s comment on ABC radio this morning about the need for transparency, I ask - (1) When was the minister first made aware of an application by the port of Esperance to amend its environmental licence to allow stockpiling of lead carbonate or powder instead of the more stable pellets? (2) Did the minister’s department or the port fail to consult the Esperance community about the proposed change to the export licence, and was a public awareness campaign put in place once the amendment was approved? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN
Given the grave concern in Esperance about lead levels and the minister’s comment on ABC radio this morning about the need for transparency, I ask - (1) When was the minister first made aware of an application by the port of Esperance to amend its environmental licence to allow stockpiling of lead carbonate or powder instead of the more stable pellets? (2) Did the minister’s department or the port fail to consult the Esperance community about the proposed change to the export licence, and was a public awareness campaign put in place once the amendment was approved? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
(1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
(1) When was the minister first made aware of an application by the port of Esperance to amend its environmental licence to allow stockpiling of lead carbonate or powder instead of the more stable pellets? (2) Did the minister’s department or the port fail to consult the Esperance community about the proposed change to the export licence, and was a public awareness campaign put in place once the amendment was approved? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
(2) Did the minister’s department or the port fail to consult the Esperance community about the proposed change to the export licence, and was a public awareness campaign put in place once the amendment was approved? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
(1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
(2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
(1) When was the minister first made aware of an application by the port of Esperance to amend its environmental licence to allow stockpiling of lead carbonate or powder instead of the more stable pellets? (2) Did the minister’s department or the port fail to consult the Esperance community about the proposed change to the export licence, and was a public awareness campaign put in place once the amendment was approved? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
(2) Did the minister’s department or the port fail to consult the Esperance community about the proposed change to the export licence, and was a public awareness campaign put in place once the amendment was approved? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
(1) As far as I have been able to ascertain, a formal application to change the licence was never made after exports in conglomerate form began. I clearly acknowledge that I have been unable at this point to get any data on when such an application may have been made. I asked to see the actual licence when this issue first emerged in mid-March. In my discussions with the port - I asked for this to be checked again today when the member quite kindly gave me notice of this question - I asked whether the port could provide any documentation that shows that it sought a change to its licence. To date, we have been unable to uncover any such document. (2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
(2) No; the port did not consult the community about that. I consider that a failing given that, in its original advertising for the approval to gain the change to its licence to export lead, it stated that the lead would be transported in this conglomerated form. I clearly acknowledge that there has been a failing on the part of the port in this regard and, for that, I deeply apologise to the people of Esperance.
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.