|Question On Notice No. 745 asked in the Legislative Council on 13 March 2018 by Hon Robin Scott |
Question Directed to the: Minister for Environment representing the Minister for Lands
Minister responding: Hon R. Saffioti
Parliament: 40 Session: 1
(1) In respect of a proposed
purchase of Lot 1522 on deposited plan 186 503, job 1646192, can the Minister
confirm that on 1 March 2018 the State Land Officer, Case Management,
Goldfields Esperance and Wheatbelt named Jihan Baroquillo, wrote to the
applicant, Mr Peter Green in the following terms: "The Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage
(DPLH) have considered information and advice pertaining to your application
for issue of a lease or to purchase (Part Reserve 18966) Lot 1522 on Deposited
Firstly, there are concerns with the merits
and likelihood of success for the development of a commercial plantation of
sandalwood in what is a low rainfall zone. It is estimated that it will take 50
years for a plantation in this area to reach commercial potential.
Secondly, the proposed area being Lot 1522 forms
part of Reserve 18966. Areas of Reserve 18966 are proposed to be included into
the adjoining Yellowdine National Park Reserve as per the Conservation
Reserve for Western Australia 1975 report (known as the Red Book report). Based on the above, DPLH is not in a position to
issue tenure over Lot 1522. Please be advised that Job 164192 will now be
(2) Can the Minister explain why the DPLH
purports to evaluate the commercial viability of a project when considering an
(3) If no to (2), why
(4) Can the Minister
state what specific qualifications are possessed by the staff of DPLH which
might give them the wisdom to pronounce on such matters?
(5) If no to (4), why
(6) Can the Minister
explain why a buyer should be prevented from making a purchase of land unused
for fifteen years on the ground of a four-decades-old report which may never be
(7) If no to (6), why not?
(8) Can the Minister explain why the DPLH is
preventing a project which has the potential to bring to Western Australia employment, export
income, rail freight and port charges?
(9) If no to (8), why not?
(10) Will the Minister personally review this
example of bureaucratic overreach?