❓ Question regarding a proposed industrial land development in South Pinjar and its impact on the Wanneroo electorate. The Minister assures that the process is complex and further investigations are needed before any rezoning decisions are made.
AnsweredQoN 779Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
SOUTH PINJAR — INDUSTRIAL LAND DEVELOPMENT
As the minister knows, I share the concerns of my electorate of Wanneroo about the possibility of an industrial land development in the south Pinjar area. Can the minister please inform the house of the issues involved in this proposal and what this means for my electorate? Mr J.H.D. DAY
As the minister knows, I share the concerns of my electorate of Wanneroo about the possibility of an industrial land development in the south Pinjar area. Can the minister please inform the house of the issues involved in this proposal and what this means for my electorate? Mr J.H.D. DAY
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question and I am aware of the concerns that have been raised by some of the member’s constituents about the possibility—I emphasise “possibility”—of land in the south Pinjar area being designated for industrial land development. It is important to understand, too, the overall aspects of this issue. The first aspect is that the process that is being gone through at the moment with the “Industrial Land Strategy 2009: Perth and Peel” is part of a complex, long and involved process whereby all relevant issues will be fully assessed and decisions about whether land is ultimately rezoned for industrial use are probably quite some way off. Indeed, I quote from the draft industrial land strategy put out in 2009 that, amongst other things, states — However, it is important to note that the under investigation status allocated to these sites does not imply that the land will be inevitably rezoned to industrial. Significant further investigations must be carried out before any type of rezoning is considered. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: I thank the member for the question and I am aware of the concerns that have been raised by some of the member’s constituents about the possibility—I emphasise “possibility”—of land in the south Pinjar area being designated for industrial land development. It is important to understand, too, the overall aspects of this issue. The first aspect is that the process that is being gone through at the moment with the “Industrial Land Strategy 2009: Perth and Peel” is part of a complex, long and involved process whereby all relevant issues will be fully assessed and decisions about whether land is ultimately rezoned for industrial use are probably quite some way off. Indeed, I quote from the draft industrial land strategy put out in 2009 that, amongst other things, states — However, it is important to note that the under investigation status allocated to these sites does not imply that the land will be inevitably rezoned to industrial. Significant further investigations must be carried out before any type of rezoning is considered. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
I thank the member for the question and I am aware of the concerns that have been raised by some of the member’s constituents about the possibility—I emphasise “possibility”—of land in the south Pinjar area being designated for industrial land development. It is important to understand, too, the overall aspects of this issue. The first aspect is that the process that is being gone through at the moment with the “Industrial Land Strategy 2009: Perth and Peel” is part of a complex, long and involved process whereby all relevant issues will be fully assessed and decisions about whether land is ultimately rezoned for industrial use are probably quite some way off. Indeed, I quote from the draft industrial land strategy put out in 2009 that, amongst other things, states — However, it is important to note that the under investigation status allocated to these sites does not imply that the land will be inevitably rezoned to industrial. Significant further investigations must be carried out before any type of rezoning is considered. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The first aspect is that the process that is being gone through at the moment with the “Industrial Land Strategy 2009: Perth and Peel” is part of a complex, long and involved process whereby all relevant issues will be fully assessed and decisions about whether land is ultimately rezoned for industrial use are probably quite some way off. Indeed, I quote from the draft industrial land strategy put out in 2009 that, amongst other things, states — However, it is important to note that the under investigation status allocated to these sites does not imply that the land will be inevitably rezoned to industrial. Significant further investigations must be carried out before any type of rezoning is considered. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: I thank the member for the question and I am aware of the concerns that have been raised by some of the member’s constituents about the possibility—I emphasise “possibility”—of land in the south Pinjar area being designated for industrial land development. It is important to understand, too, the overall aspects of this issue. The first aspect is that the process that is being gone through at the moment with the “Industrial Land Strategy 2009: Perth and Peel” is part of a complex, long and involved process whereby all relevant issues will be fully assessed and decisions about whether land is ultimately rezoned for industrial use are probably quite some way off. Indeed, I quote from the draft industrial land strategy put out in 2009 that, amongst other things, states — However, it is important to note that the under investigation status allocated to these sites does not imply that the land will be inevitably rezoned to industrial. Significant further investigations must be carried out before any type of rezoning is considered. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
I thank the member for the question and I am aware of the concerns that have been raised by some of the member’s constituents about the possibility—I emphasise “possibility”—of land in the south Pinjar area being designated for industrial land development. It is important to understand, too, the overall aspects of this issue. The first aspect is that the process that is being gone through at the moment with the “Industrial Land Strategy 2009: Perth and Peel” is part of a complex, long and involved process whereby all relevant issues will be fully assessed and decisions about whether land is ultimately rezoned for industrial use are probably quite some way off. Indeed, I quote from the draft industrial land strategy put out in 2009 that, amongst other things, states — However, it is important to note that the under investigation status allocated to these sites does not imply that the land will be inevitably rezoned to industrial. Significant further investigations must be carried out before any type of rezoning is considered. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The first aspect is that the process that is being gone through at the moment with the “Industrial Land Strategy 2009: Perth and Peel” is part of a complex, long and involved process whereby all relevant issues will be fully assessed and decisions about whether land is ultimately rezoned for industrial use are probably quite some way off. Indeed, I quote from the draft industrial land strategy put out in 2009 that, amongst other things, states — However, it is important to note that the under investigation status allocated to these sites does not imply that the land will be inevitably rezoned to industrial. Significant further investigations must be carried out before any type of rezoning is considered. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : That is one aspect, to which I will return in a moment. The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The other aspect that is very important to consider is that it is essential for governments to — Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : Boring us into submission! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : Mr Speaker — The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : Take a seat, minister. There may be some people in this place who are not interested in the particular question that has been asked or the answer that is being given, but other people in this place may have questions that they want to ask at another time and they might be interested in the answer being given. I expect you to respect both the person who asked the question and the person providing the answer. Thank you, members. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : I hoped that the opposition might have taken a bit of interest in this issue because members opposite have made — Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : We are interested; it is just your mind-numbing, boring way of speaking! Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : Later today, members, I hope to release the league table of the greatest offenders in this place. I understand that at the moment some of you intend to promote yourself! Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr M.P. Whitely : Can we accumulate points? The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : You cannot accumulate points. Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr W.J. Johnston : Can you get a prize? The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : There is no prize. There might be the ultimate prize for some of you! Member for Midland, I formally call you to order for the first time today. Minister for Planning. Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : Thank — Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr P.C. Tinley : You’re as boring as a dentist! Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : Witty! It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
It is essential for governments to take action to designate land for industrial land development so that our economy can further develop and, in particular, so that jobs can be created and employment provided for our growing population and for young people who are coming through our community. It is preferable that jobs are created not too far from where people live, and it is in that context that this issue also needs to be considered. The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The opposition has had a bit to say about this issue. In the Legislative Council on 9 September this year the following motion was moved by Hon Ken Travers — That this house calls on the Barnett government to immediately cease progressing the planning of a new industrial estate on the Gnangara mound at Pinjar south. At the very best, that is a very short-sighted approach by the opposition. In fact, the opposition has taken a hypocritical stance. I hope that it rethinks its position on this issue. When in government its approach was a little more enlightened. Fairly close to the end of its term in government, a decision was made and announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 3 December 2007. She announced that the then government was making $1 million available to support industrial land needs in the Perth metropolitan area and the Peel region by developing the general industrial land planning strategy. She stated — In order to boost stocks of industrial land, it is essential we undertake detailed planning and technical studies to identify land with good access to transport and other infrastructure that will support the continued growth of industry. How very true. It is a great pity that the opposition seems to have gone completely back on that statement. I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
I am aware of the concerns that this area is currently designated priority 1 in relation to groundwater supplies, but it is also important to note that the draft Gnangara Sustainability Strategy states, amongst other things — The risks and benefits of potential urban and employment generating land use as identified be investigated, with a view to determining the feasibility of amending the current Priority 1 UWPCA boundary. The possibility of boundaries being amended following due scientific assessment is contemplated. If there is going to be any change in this area, that full process would be gone through. It has been identified that unless action is taken in the Perth and Peel regions, there will be a shortfall of 4 726 hectares of industrial land by 2031, and in the north west corridor in particular there will be a shortfall of 752 hectares of land. At present there is an undersupply of jobs in the northern metropolitan area relative to what is most desirable in local employment. We need to take more action to ensure that jobs are available closer to where people live. That is a large part of what this whole process is about. I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
I am also aware that some of the local residents have concerns about the possibility of special industry being located in this area, a point that was identified in the draft industrial land strategy. Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : This is an important issue to the residents in the electorate of the member for Wanneroo. The opposition has been banging on about this issue at some length in the Legislative Council. If members opposite disagree with the approach of their Council colleagues — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
The SPEAKER : Member for Victoria Park, I formally call you to order for the first time. Member for Bassendean, if you wish to refer to the Minister for Planning, that is how I would ask you to refer to him. I formally call you to order for the first time as well. Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : There was some concern about the use of the term “special industry”. People inferred that that may mean heavy industry similar to that which exists in the Kwinana industrial strip. That is certainly not what is intended in this particular area. I understand that the reference to special industry will be removed from the final strategy. According to my notes, the draft strategy states, in part — … noting the sensitivity of this area and the context of the Gnangara Mound and to protect the groundwater resources of the Gnangara area, industrial development will be of a nature that does not pose significant risk of pollution or adverse impacts to the groundwater table. No hazardous or offensive industries will be permitted. Industries that manufacture, use or store significant quantities of toxic or polluting substances will not be permitted within the development. I think a responsible, cautious and prudent approach is being taken by the government. I hope that the opposition rethinks its position on this issue.
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.