❓ A parliamentary question addresses the omission of Indigenous heritage values from a review of mid west iron ore ranges and seeks clarification on future assessments and potential impacts on mining approvals. The Minister's response indicates that heritage assessments will occur during project-specific approvals.
AnsweredQoN 1053Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
MID WEST IRON ORE RANGES REVIEW - INDIGENOUS HERITAGE VALUES
I refer to the fact that Indigenous heritage values were not addressed in the strategic review of the mid west iron ore ranges. Given that there are reportedly many sacred sites in the ranges, I ask - (1) Why were Indigenous heritage values omitted from this review? (2) Will Indigenous heritage values for the banded iron formation ranges be reviewed in parallel with the strategic review; and (a) if not, why not; (b) if yes, given that there are already significant delays in mining approvals, how much additional time will this add to the full review process? (3) Given that the review chart showing the government’s “predisposition” for mining approvals did not include Indigenous heritage values, does this mean that the government’s “predisposition” can be expected to change once Indigenous heritage values are assessed? Hon KIM CHANCE
I refer to the fact that Indigenous heritage values were not addressed in the strategic review of the mid west iron ore ranges. Given that there are reportedly many sacred sites in the ranges, I ask - (1) Why were Indigenous heritage values omitted from this review? (2) Will Indigenous heritage values for the banded iron formation ranges be reviewed in parallel with the strategic review; and (a) if not, why not; (b) if yes, given that there are already significant delays in mining approvals, how much additional time will this add to the full review process? (3) Given that the review chart showing the government’s “predisposition” for mining approvals did not include Indigenous heritage values, does this mean that the government’s “predisposition” can be expected to change once Indigenous heritage values are assessed? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(1) Why were Indigenous heritage values omitted from this review? (2) Will Indigenous heritage values for the banded iron formation ranges be reviewed in parallel with the strategic review; and (a) if not, why not; (b) if yes, given that there are already significant delays in mining approvals, how much additional time will this add to the full review process? (3) Given that the review chart showing the government’s “predisposition” for mining approvals did not include Indigenous heritage values, does this mean that the government’s “predisposition” can be expected to change once Indigenous heritage values are assessed? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(2) Will Indigenous heritage values for the banded iron formation ranges be reviewed in parallel with the strategic review; and (a) if not, why not; (b) if yes, given that there are already significant delays in mining approvals, how much additional time will this add to the full review process? (3) Given that the review chart showing the government’s “predisposition” for mining approvals did not include Indigenous heritage values, does this mean that the government’s “predisposition” can be expected to change once Indigenous heritage values are assessed? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(b) if yes, given that there are already significant delays in mining approvals, how much additional time will this add to the full review process?
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(1) Why were Indigenous heritage values omitted from this review? (2) Will Indigenous heritage values for the banded iron formation ranges be reviewed in parallel with the strategic review; and (a) if not, why not; (b) if yes, given that there are already significant delays in mining approvals, how much additional time will this add to the full review process? (3) Given that the review chart showing the government’s “predisposition” for mining approvals did not include Indigenous heritage values, does this mean that the government’s “predisposition” can be expected to change once Indigenous heritage values are assessed? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(2) Will Indigenous heritage values for the banded iron formation ranges be reviewed in parallel with the strategic review; and (a) if not, why not; (b) if yes, given that there are already significant delays in mining approvals, how much additional time will this add to the full review process? (3) Given that the review chart showing the government’s “predisposition” for mining approvals did not include Indigenous heritage values, does this mean that the government’s “predisposition” can be expected to change once Indigenous heritage values are assessed? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(b) if yes, given that there are already significant delays in mining approvals, how much additional time will this add to the full review process?
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
I thank Hon Brian Ellis for providing some notice of this question. (1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(1) With a number of potential iron ore mining ventures proposed in the mid west region, the government undertook the review to gain a better understanding of the uniqueness of each banded iron range and the possible cumulative impacts of mining on the flora and fauna. Sacred sites are specific locations, and until companies have fully delineated their respective projects, it is unknown whether any sites will be impacted. (2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
(2) (a) See (1). (b) Not applicable. (3) The review states at page 10 that “nothing in these undertakings derogates from the operation of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 and consideration of proposals by the EPA”. The review was undertaken with current knowledge. As development proposals are submitted by proponents, the additional information may influence government decision making.
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.