❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the Minister for Environment regarding the decision to allow mining at Windarling Range, seeking details on conditions, conservation offsets, and the Mt Manning Nature Reserve extension. The Minister provides answers and tables relevant documents.
AnsweredQoN 1472Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the decision of the minister to overturn the Environmental Protection Authority’s advice in bulletin 1082 that mining not be allowed at Windarling Range. (1) Will the minister provide a copy of the conditions imposed on Portman Mining Ltd by the minister? (2) Did the minister at any time give a commitment that an extension to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve would be considered as a form of conservation offset? (3) If yes to (2), can the minister provide a copy of any statement made in this regard? (4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(1) Will the minister provide a copy of the conditions imposed on Portman Mining Ltd by the minister? (2) Did the minister at any time give a commitment that an extension to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve would be considered as a form of conservation offset? (3) If yes to (2), can the minister provide a copy of any statement made in this regard? (4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(2) Did the minister at any time give a commitment that an extension to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve would be considered as a form of conservation offset? (3) If yes to (2), can the minister provide a copy of any statement made in this regard? (4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(3) If yes to (2), can the minister provide a copy of any statement made in this regard? (4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
[See paper No 1658.]
(1) Will the minister provide a copy of the conditions imposed on Portman Mining Ltd by the minister? (2) Did the minister at any time give a commitment that an extension to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve would be considered as a form of conservation offset? (3) If yes to (2), can the minister provide a copy of any statement made in this regard? (4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(2) Did the minister at any time give a commitment that an extension to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve would be considered as a form of conservation offset? (3) If yes to (2), can the minister provide a copy of any statement made in this regard? (4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(3) If yes to (2), can the minister provide a copy of any statement made in this regard? (4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(4) If yes to (2), can the minister provide an update on progress towards this objective? (5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(5) If yes to (2), was the minister’s approval of the Portman Mining expansion into Windarling conditional on the extension of the Mt Manning Nature Reserve? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
I thank the member for some notice of this question. In response to an exchange that took place across the Chamber a few moments ago, I will just observe that the nature of questions that can properly be answered during questions without notice is rather different from the nature of questions that can more appropriately be placed on notice. Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
Hon Alan Cadby: Some of my questions were sent to ministers a week before being asked in the House. Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
Hon KIM CHANCE: That simply indicates that some members do not understand the process. I am simply trying to explain to members who do not understand the process that the nature of a question suitable to be asked during questions without notice is somewhat different from the nature of a question on notice. To illustrate this in answering the question of Hon Robin Chapple, the bundle of papers I am holding is the answer to his question. (1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(1) Yes, and I seek to table the attachments. (2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(2) In making a decision on appeals related to the proposal, the Minister for the Environment committed to ensuring timely implementation of key aspects of CALM’s goldfields regional management plan 1994-2000, with particular reference to the progression of the proposed extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve outlined in that plan as a priority. (3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(3) Yes. A copy of correspondence to an appellant detailing the minister’s appeal determination, which provides a statement in relation to this matter, will be tabled. (4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(4) The matter is being progressed at an interagency level. (5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
(5) The minister’s approval of the proposal was not conditional on the extensions to the Mt Manning Nature Reserve. However, the progression of the extensions was one of the many considerations taken into account in making a determination on the matter. I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
I table the material referred to. [See paper No 1658.]
[See paper No 1658.]
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.