Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, upon notice, on 16 March 2011:

With reference to the Olympic Dam's Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and the Minister's answer to question on notice no. 366 (Senate Hansard, 1 March 2011, p. 874) regarding the proposed expansion of the Olympic Dam, and specifically parts (1) (b) to (d) which state: 'It would therefore not be appropriate to limit the assessment or decision on the basis of a specific rate of mine production':

(1)   Does this leave open the option for the Federal Government to approve a larger scale project, with consequent larger scale impacts, than was assessed in the draft EIS and that underwent public consultation.

(2)   Is this not contrary to the provisions of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 to ensure the public is 'properly' informed throughout the environment assessment process.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question:

(1) As stated in the response to question on notice no. 366, the proposal being considered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 is that described in the referral received on 16 August 2005 and as varied on 24 October 2008 and 9 June 2010. Under the EPBC Act, the minister may only accept the variation if satisfied that the character of the varied proposal is substantially the same as the character of the original proposal, having regard to the nature of the activities proposed to be carried out and the nature and extent of the impacts of the action.

(2) See answer to question (1).