Skip to main content

Parliamentary Questions

Question Without Notice No. 522 asked in the Legislative Council on 16 May 2019 by Hon Robin Scott

Minister responding: Hon S.N. Dawson
Parliament: 40 Session: 1

Answered on


522. Hon ROBIN SCOTT to the Minister for Environment:

(1) Did the Appeals Convenor urge Ramelius Resources to submit an alternative proposal during the appeals process?

(2) Did the company follow this advice by submitting a proposal with a significantly smaller footprint for clearing 26 hectares, and did the Appeals Convenor then not assess the proposal?

(3) Can the minister confirm that Ramelius Resources managing director, Mark Zeptner, has stated that there is $100 million worth of gold sitting in the ground and 100 jobs on standby?

(4) Noting that a year has already been wasted, will the government now expedite approval for the alternative proposal?

(5) Will the minister confirm that a letter dated 19 February 2019 addressed to the minister and signed by the chief executive officer of the Shire of Westonia contained this statement —

Ramelius � has shown a great ability previously to preserve and enhance threatened flora such as Eremophila Resinosa. Several successful translocation sites have been established in and around the Town Common, increasing the E. Resinosa populations within the district.


I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question.

(1) I am advised that the Appeals Convenor did not ask Ramelius Resources to submit an alternative proposal; but, instead, consistent with her usual practice, encouraged the company to submit any additional information it believed would address the concerns raised by the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety in its decision to refuse the permit, including opportunities to reduce the identified impacts.

(2) The company did submit additional information as part of the appeal investigation, which included a proposal to reduce the area of clearing to 26.3 hectares. The Appeals Convenor provided this information to me as part of her report. As the information represented a significantly different proposal to the one considered by DMIRS, I agreed with the Appeals Convenor that it was more appropriate that the revised proposal be the subject of a new assessment.

(3)–(4) I have encouraged Ramelius Resources to make a new application so that the revised proposal can be properly assessed. Given the work that has already been undertaken to draft this new proposal, I expect that it will be submitted promptly and that it contains high-quality information that substantially addresses the identified environmental risks, and we will ensure that it is processed efficiently.

(5) Yes. That letter was received by my office on 26 February 2019.