❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding mine safety in Kalgoorlie, specifically concerning pit wall failure risks, the adequacy of safety exclusion zones, and the relevance of past reports. The Minister deflects some questions to other portfolios.
AnsweredQoN 4924Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(2) If no to (1), will the Minister quote the full text of the File note dated on or about 25 September 1992?
(3) Will the Minister table a copy of the file note dated on or about 25 September 1992?
(4) Is it the Minister aware that A/Professor Tony Cooke, in his report dated January 2004, stated the following,‘The risk of pit wall failure at a depth of 700 metres is a catastrophe within 350metres, in any setting. Boulder is not any setting. For that reason particularly given doubt over the final depth of the Super Pit, the retention of the 400 metres SEZ is justified … The recommendation requires assessment of both current and future risks since the hazard of pit wall failure exists during the life of mine and forever thereafter. For this reason no retrospectivity is proposed to this amendment, if the Super pit is proposed in the future to exceed a depth of 800 metres, the SEZ should be increased proportionately’?
(5) If no to (4), will the Minister clearly make himself fully informed on these matters?
(6) If yes to (4), how did the Minister specifically become aware of what was stated in the January 2004 report?
(7) Is it correct that the 2002 report with various text quotations referred to in the
Sunday Times
article dated 6 May 2007 is the Laing Consultation Draft Report?
(8) Is it correct that the 2002 Laing Consultation Draft Report, a review of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Ac
t, after various recommendations were made led to the engagement of the Review conducted by Mr Tony Cooke titled ‘Review of Environmental and Public Safety Impacts of Mining in the Kalgoorlie area’?
(9) If no to (8), what specifically is correct?
(3) Will the Minister table a copy of the file note dated on or about 25 September 1992?
(4) Is it the Minister aware that A/Professor Tony Cooke, in his report dated January 2004, stated the following,‘The risk of pit wall failure at a depth of 700 metres is a catastrophe within 350metres, in any setting. Boulder is not any setting. For that reason particularly given doubt over the final depth of the Super Pit, the retention of the 400 metres SEZ is justified … The recommendation requires assessment of both current and future risks since the hazard of pit wall failure exists during the life of mine and forever thereafter. For this reason no retrospectivity is proposed to this amendment, if the Super pit is proposed in the future to exceed a depth of 800 metres, the SEZ should be increased proportionately’?
(5) If no to (4), will the Minister clearly make himself fully informed on these matters?
(6) If yes to (4), how did the Minister specifically become aware of what was stated in the January 2004 report?
(7) Is it correct that the 2002 report with various text quotations referred to in the
Sunday Times
article dated 6 May 2007 is the Laing Consultation Draft Report?
(8) Is it correct that the 2002 Laing Consultation Draft Report, a review of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Ac
t, after various recommendations were made led to the engagement of the Review conducted by Mr Tony Cooke titled ‘Review of Environmental and Public Safety Impacts of Mining in the Kalgoorlie area’?
(9) If no to (8), what specifically is correct?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 August 2007
Responded by
Minister for Child Protection representing the Minister for Employment Protection
Response time
77 days
The Department of Consumer and Employment Protection (DOCEP) has advised the Minister for Employment Protection that this question includes matters under the portfolios of the Minister for Resources and the Minister for Environment and I would suggest that those aspects be referred to the appropriate Minister. However, the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection has researched the relevant material and I provide the following answer -
(1) Yes.
(2) Not applicable.
(3) I table a copy of the File Note. See Tabled Paper No:
(4) As the report of Professor Tony Cooke of January 2004 referred to in the question was commissioned by the then Minister for State Development via the Department of Industry and Resources and principally concerned matters in relation to the Mining Act 1978, administered by that Minister and that Department, I was not previously aware of the contents of the report. However, I can confirm that the statement quoted in the question is contained in the report at the second paragraph below Recommendation 6 on p.197 of the Cooke Report. I note that recommendation 6 relates specifically to a proposed amendment to the Mining Act 1978, which is administered by the Department of Industry and Resources, under the Minister for Resources. It may be appropriate to refer this question to that Minister.
(5) Refer to (4) above.
(6) Refer to (4) above.
(7) The Consultation Draft of the Laing Review of the Mines Safety and Inspection Act was dated 18 February 2002 and contains the reference, quoted in the Sunday Times article, at paragraph 464 on p. 125.
(8) This question should be directed to the Minister for Resources as the issues raised fall within the jurisdiction of this Minister and the Mining Act 1978. However, the Consultation Draft of the Laing review of the Mines Safety and Inspection Act contains sections relating to issues not strictly within Laing's terms of reference that were raised by Kalgoorlie residents in submissions and hearings, which are dealt with in the Consultation Draft under sections 5.2.2.1 Kalgoorlie Residents and Mining Operations (p.119, paragraphs 439 - 453), 5.2.2.2 Other Kalgoorlie Issues (p.454 -465) and 5.2.2.3 Small Leaseholders (p.125, paragraphs 466 - 473) which led Laing to make Recommendation 49, at p.128 of the Consultation Draft which states --
R:49 It is recommended the Minister direct an independent specialist review of the issues raised by small leaseholders from the Kalgoorlie area. The result of the review should be made available to interested parties.
(9) Refer to response to Part (8).
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
(1) Yes.
(2) Not applicable.
(3) I table a copy of the File Note. See Tabled Paper No:
(4) As the report of Professor Tony Cooke of January 2004 referred to in the question was commissioned by the then Minister for State Development via the Department of Industry and Resources and principally concerned matters in relation to the Mining Act 1978, administered by that Minister and that Department, I was not previously aware of the contents of the report. However, I can confirm that the statement quoted in the question is contained in the report at the second paragraph below Recommendation 6 on p.197 of the Cooke Report. I note that recommendation 6 relates specifically to a proposed amendment to the Mining Act 1978, which is administered by the Department of Industry and Resources, under the Minister for Resources. It may be appropriate to refer this question to that Minister.
(5) Refer to (4) above.
(6) Refer to (4) above.
(7) The Consultation Draft of the Laing Review of the Mines Safety and Inspection Act was dated 18 February 2002 and contains the reference, quoted in the Sunday Times article, at paragraph 464 on p. 125.
(8) This question should be directed to the Minister for Resources as the issues raised fall within the jurisdiction of this Minister and the Mining Act 1978. However, the Consultation Draft of the Laing review of the Mines Safety and Inspection Act contains sections relating to issues not strictly within Laing's terms of reference that were raised by Kalgoorlie residents in submissions and hearings, which are dealt with in the Consultation Draft under sections 5.2.2.1 Kalgoorlie Residents and Mining Operations (p.119, paragraphs 439 - 453), 5.2.2.2 Other Kalgoorlie Issues (p.454 -465) and 5.2.2.3 Small Leaseholders (p.125, paragraphs 466 - 473) which led Laing to make Recommendation 49, at p.128 of the Consultation Draft which states --
R:49 It is recommended the Minister direct an independent specialist review of the issues raised by small leaseholders from the Kalgoorlie area. The result of the review should be made available to interested parties.
(9) Refer to response to Part (8).
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
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.