Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Olympic Dam Expansion OLYMPIC DAM EXPANSION The Hon. M. PARNELL Legislative Council OLYMPIC DAM EXPANSION The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:24): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Regional Development, as Leader of the Government, questions in relation to the Olympic Dam expansion. Leave granted. The Hon. M. PARNELL Legislative Council The Hon. M. PARNELL: As all members know, under section 13 of the Roxby Downs (Indenture Ratification) (Amendment of Indenture) Amendment Act 2011, BHP has only 12 months after the act came into operation to commit to the Olympic Dam expansion project or lose its approval; that period expires on 15 December this year. The act provides that any extension granted by the government has to be tabled in parliament, where either house can disallow it. Last month, soon after BHP Billiton announced that it was not going ahead with the project, the Premier advised parliament that he anticipated BHP Billiton's seeking an extension. The Premier said: Obviously, in the event that it seeks an extension, BHP Billiton will need to satisfy the government that the circumstances in which it has found itself are sufficient to enable the government to lawfully consider an extension. It will also need to explain the way in which it intends to proceed on the expansion and how this differs from the original proposal, so that we can properly consider the request. It is, however, becoming increasingly apparent that the project is now very far off. Commentators are now starting to use the word 'cancelled' rather than 'deferred'. I note reports from Marius Kloppers (the CEO of BHP Billiton) last week in London, where he is reported to have said: We've been very clear that on Olympic Dam we're not in a position to take any decision for years. Yet, on the other hand, according to an article by Kevin Naughton in InDaily last Friday: Paul Heithersay, CEO of the state government's Olympic Dam Task Force, has told several industry forums the project is 'deferred' and could very quickly come back onto the table. What is now clear is that the approvals that had been given will not match any likely reincarnation of the project. The proposed open-cut project is off and the only proposal being talked about by BHP Billiton is some sort of chemical leaching process. Marius Kloppers again in London last week said: Time is needed to allow for the results of new leaching technologies that facilitate extraction of minerals from ore. My questions to the minister are: 1.	Is it true that the government has granted to BHP Billiton an extension of time in which to commit to the expansion project as reported in InDaily and, if so, when can we expect this extension to be tabled in parliament? 2.	Whether or not a decision has been made, why on earth would the government consider granting an extension when it is clear that the project will never go ahead in its currently approved form, or indeed in any form, in the foreseeable future when the option exists to go back to the drawing board and negotiate a better outcome for the people of South Australia and for our environment? The Hon. G.E. GAGO Legislative Council Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women) (15:27): I thank the member for his question. The Premier has made his position on this matter quite clear: that he will not be approving an extension if there is no benefit to South Australia. To the best of my knowledge, no decision has been made in relation to the several criteria the honourable member has outlined, which would underpin the considerations of any potential for an extension. As I said, he has been completely transparent about that. The Greens must be celebrating this setback with joy; they have never supported this project. We know that this is an important project for South Australia that has been delayed. I have outlined in this place before that, in terms of mining developments in this place, many other mining developments are occurring that are not reliant on the Olympic Dam project. There are many developments currently under way and in the pipeline that show a great deal of promise and prosperity for this state. We have a commitment to our advanced manufacturing agenda, our premium food and wine from a clean environment. We have a number of key planks to serve as an economic plan for this state, and we are getting on with that plan. While the opposition is in complete disarray, fighting over the spoils of leadership, we are out there getting on with the job. I have said in this place time and time again that all the opposition, and the Greens on this occasion, want to do is talk down the state, bag South Australia, bag initiatives. These are about jobs. These projects are about the future prosperity of this state. Rather than fight about our leadership and elect a deputy leader who does not even support the current leader—it is unbelievable; I think there have been four or five different leaders since we came into government and more challenges than I have had hot dinners. We know there is going to be at least one more leadership challenge before the next election. We know that is going to happen. We know the opposition has no plans, no policies, no ideas and, clearly, no discipline.