Skip to main content
Home
  • The Legislative Assembly meets on 07/05/2024 (01:00 PM)
    Assembly sit 07/05/2024
  • The Legislative Council meets on 07/05/2024 (01:00 PM)
    Council sit 07/05/2024
  • The Public Administration meets on 29/04/2024 (11:00 AM)
    Committee meet 29/04/2024

Parliamentary Questions


Question Without Notice No. 436 asked in the Legislative Council on 5 August 2021 by Hon Colin De Grussa

Parliament: 41 Session: 1

ESPERANCE PORT — SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENTS

436. Hon COLIN de GRUSSA to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Ports:

I refer to the answer provided to question without notice 416 asked yesterday by me.

For each of the reportable safety incidents recorded at the port of Esperance between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2021 —

(a) what was that nature of the incident;

(b) were there any lost-time injuries; and, if so, what was the nature of the injuries and what was the quantum of hours lost;

(c) were any of the safety incidents the result of conduct or activities of contracted service providers; and, if so, can the minister please specify the service provider; and

(d) what action was taken against the service provider, or their personnel, referred to in (c)?

Hon SUE ELLERY replied:

I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. I just point out that I have a correction to make to one of the numbers in the answer to the question the member asked yesterday, and I will do that at the end of question time.

(a) The incidents concerning iron ore were a conveyor bearing fire; a contractor tripping on an iron ore cleaning vacuum hose and hurting their lower back, with a lost-time injury; a port employee having a medically treated injury after hurting their shoulder while adjusting a conveyor belt drift; and a port employee having a medically treated injury—a neck and shoulder injury—as a result of cleaning blocked conveyor chutes.

There were two incidents concerning sulphur. One was the ignition of sulphur around a sweeper truck, with the fire rapidly extinguished, resulting in a port employee with a one-day precautionary LTI due to potential smoke inhalation. The second was a rolled ankle injury on the deck of a sulphur vessel, with an MTI to a port employee.

(b) There were two LTIs: a person who tripped on an iron ore cleaning vacuum hose and hurt their lower back, resulting in 59 days lost time; and a sulphur ignition around a sweeper truck, with the fire rapidly extinguished, resulting in an employee with a one-day precautionary LTI due to potential smoke inhalation.

(c) Yes; refer to the answers to (a) and (b).

(d) The following action was taken: for the person who tripped on the iron ore cleaning vacuum hose and hurt their lower back, the port conducted a full review of the contractor's safety management systems and issued actions to be completed from the event, and the corrective actions were resolved. For the incident involving sulphur igniting around a sweeper truck, with the fire rapidly extinguished, which resulted in an employee with a one-day precautionary LTI due to potential smoke inhalation, the port issued a stop-work authority until the contractor satisfied the port's conditions for operating in the sulphur shed, and the corrective actions were resolved.