HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-02-19 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

OLYMPIC DAM

The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:04): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Mineral Resources Development a question about public consultation on the Olympic Dam expansion project EIS.

Leave granted.

The Hon. M. PARNELL: On Tuesday, in reply to my question on Point Lowly, the minister stated:

There is currently an environmental impact statement (which is being printed as we speak) by BHP Billiton relating to its proposals for the Point Lowly area. I believe that will be released on 1 May and it will be the largest document ever printed in this state when it is prepared.

This morning on ABC Radio, the minister, in response to a question by Kieran Weir as to whether the EIS has been completed, stated:

I believe that BHP will now be undertaking the process of printing it, and given the size of it and the need to proofread it that is why I believe that it will take most of the next two and a bit months to ensure the document is ready for release.

My questions over the past three years, and other members' questions, about the Olympic Dam expansion have generally been answered with the response, 'Wait for the EIS.' My questions of the minister are:

1. Given that this is the largest project in the state's history, set to become the largest open cut mine in the world and a project that has the potential to use, for example, half of the state's electricity, why are only 40 working days being provided for public consultation when other Planning SA organised consultation events are provided with a much longer period, such as the three months that was provided for comment on the Victoria Park grandstand proposal?

2. Why, if the minister knows that it will take the team at BHP Billiton most of the next two and a bit months just to proofread this massive document, does the minister think that it is acceptable for the South Australian public to have significantly less than two and a half months to find a copy, read and analyse it and then write a formal submission on the EIS?

3. Will the minister now extend the public consultation period for the Olympic Dam expansion EIS beyond eight weeks by either bringing the release date forward or by extending it afterwards and, if not, why not?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:07): The statutory time for public consultation in relation to major projects is six weeks. The government made the decision some time back to announce that it would be eight weeks, given that this is such a significant project.

The environmental impact statement has been in preparation for something like three years. It was back in February 2006 that the guidelines were first approved. As I said on the radio this morning in the interview the honourable member is referring to, I think it is about 55 pages for the first part of the draft guidelines and about 50 pages for the second part.

The PRESIDENT: As long as Mr Parnell's speech!

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Yes; almost that long. The first part was to do with the issues that relate to the mineral lease area which, of course, is the mine at Olympic Dam, the processing plant expansion, the township of Roxby Downs and so on. The other issues that need to be addressed are power, water and transport.

As I pointed out on the radio this morning, the EIS statement will, we believe, satisfy the requirements of the commonwealth government and also of the Northern Territory government, because part of the issues addressed in it will be the possibility of any transport of material to Darwin. It will also, of course, look at other issues such as the desalination plant at Point Lowly. It was in that context that I made my comments earlier this week relating to the honourable member's question.

There has already been an extension of time. As I also pointed out in that interview this morning, those people who are interested in this issue I am sure will have been following these issues very closely. If someone is concerned about issues such as the impact of the desalination plant on Upper Spencer Gulf, there will be this huge document about the entire mine and all the associated issues. If they wish to look at that they will be able to find that chapter of it fairly quickly and make their comments.

I think we know what the Greens' view will be on this project. We know that they will find something wrong with it. I do not think you need a crystal ball to predict that they will be opposed to this particular expansion of Olympic Dam.

I believe there is sufficient time in the extension that the government has given for consideration of this project. In relation to the preparation of it, these major environmental impact statements are supplied to the government in the first instance to ensure that each of the issues that are set out in the guidelines for the EIS has been addressed—not to say that they have been addressed adequately but to say they have been addressed. It is at that point that the EIS then goes off to be printed and published, and that is the stage we are at now.

BHP has estimated that that is the time it will take. I suppose BHP has to let contracts, do the proof reading and everything else. That is the time BHP believes is required and, given the size of this document, I think that is reasonable. It is up to BHP as to when it releases the EIS, but the indication BHP has given the government is that it will be about 1 May.

In relation to the public consultation period, public meetings will likely be held not just in Roxby Downs and Adelaide but one would expect there will also be public consultations and meetings in Whyalla, Port Augusta and also in the Northern Territory. It will be a major exercise, but we believe there will be plenty of time for people to look at the document and make comments on the issues involved in this very significant project for the state.

As I also indicated in the radio interview this morning, you will always get people who ask for additional time. We often get submissions that come in a few days or even up to a week or two late, and it is always my practice and that of the department to accept those late submissions, provided they come within the assessment period but, of course, there has to be some cut-off date.

We believe that the eight-week period is reasonable and, when the EIS is released—which, hopefully, will be in early May—we would expect people to try to get their responses in within the eight-week period provided; but, of course, we will be reasonable in that regard if people are a day or two late. However, we believe that is adequate time.

I think the issues have been well canvassed. BHP Billiton had a number of public meetings during the preparation of the EIS, where BHP Billiton has discussed all the issues with, I think, all the communities that have concerns with particular parts of this project, whether they relate to the mine itself, the township of Roxby Downs, the desalination plant or transportation through the Northern Territory or elsewhere. I think people will be well briefed and will be able to make a judgment in a short time as to whether or not, in their view, the EIS adequately addresses those issues.

Of course, once that period of consultation comes to an end, BHP will then be required to respond. The response document will then go to the government for a detailed assessment. So, it is a very long process, and we believe that the extended eight-week period should allow for adequate consultation on this project.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT