Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. Last night we discussed the process that the company needs to go through to get from exploration licences to mining leases. I was left slightly confused and I can understand why I am confused because it is complicated. Is the situation any less confused today? If the Leader of the House is less confused, he might be kind enough to explain again to me the answer to the first question I asked last night. The agreement contains schedules that list exploration licences, exploration licences for which an application is pending, and mining lease applications. The Leader of the House mentioned that the company already has a number of mining leases. Where are they listed? In schedule 1, part A lists the exploration licences and part B lists the exploration licence applications, and schedule 2 lists the mining lease applications. However, I cannot find a list of mining leases that have been granted. Is there any way I can find out those leases? Hon XXX XXXXXX: The reason that the MLs which have been now granted and which at the time of the signing of the agreement were proposed to be granted are not listed in the agreement is that the agreement is dated December 2005. Those 89 MLs that I referred to yesterday were granted in March and April of this year. I am unable to provide the Leader of the Opposition with a list of those MLs now, but I will provide him with it. I cannot provide the list now, although there is a representation of them on a map in front of me, because they are not in a list that is suitable for presentation to Parliament. We could provide the list within the next couple of days. Hon XXXXXX XXXXX: That is fine; I just needed an explanation. There is no need to provide the list within the next couple of days. Hon XXX XXXXXX: To answer the second question first, everything that is listed in the schedule has to go through the Mining Act provisions. The answer to the first question is yes, they were granted under the Mining Act. Hon XXXXXX XXXXX: In relation to the granting of these leases and the intention to proceed through the Mining Act processes to convert the ELs to MLs in due course, do the requirements of native title processes have to be met by the company? Hon XXX XXXXXX: Yes.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. With respect, there are no guarantees about that whatsoever. Indeed, the standing orders provide that once it is determined that it is a standing order 230A bill, it automatically goes to a committee. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Hon Xxxx Xxxxxx-Xxxxxxx): I am reliably informed that the resolution of the point of order raised earlier by Xxx Xxx Xxxxxxx will be provided in 10 or 15 minutes. The President is meeting as we speak.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. Go and read the state agreement. Go and read it! Xxx XXXXX XXXXXXX: I have; I have it in front of me. Hon Xxxxxx Xxxxx: Read the bit about where the company has to consult with any landholder and reach agreement with them. Xxx XXXXX XXXXXXX: They have to consult. That is a lovely word “consult”.
Examples of Hon XXXXXX XXXXX in a sentence
The project will generate $75 billion of export income; $3.5 billion in capital expenditure; $3.3 billion in royalties; $31 million in stamp duty; 2 500 construction jobs; 500 or 600 permanent jobs, I am not sure which — Xxx Xxxx Xxxxxxxxx: It might be 500 or 600! Hon XXXXXX XXXXX: It might be 500, 600 or even 900 permanent jobs.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX: I am not going to go there, not because I do not have a good argument but I — Xxx Xxx Xxxxxxx: Because you don’t! Hon XXXXXX XXXXX: Actually, I do.
My question was about which components of any contract would be Hon XXXXXX XXXXX: Sino Iron is one of the co-proponents of this contract.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX: It may well be, but I am not sure whether that is a significant problem, frankly.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX: I am advised that it relates to medical research and support of the Indigenous communities of the Shire of Roebourne, so that the funds are for medical research related to Indigenous issues.
More Definitions of Hon XXXXXX XXXXX
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. If you don’t want to have this state agreement, just vote against it so that we don’t have to worry about — Xxx XXXXX XXXXXXX: I will be; do not worry! However, we will deal with that when we come to the substance of the bill. I am dealing with the motion at the moment, honourable minister.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. You actually don’t.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. There is no problem. We have always debated the contents of the agreements, except you cannot amend them. It’s a simple fact of life. Xxx XXXXX XXXXXXX: That is really good, if we can debate the content, I am going to be really — Hon Xxxxxx Xxxxx: You can argue all you like — Xxx XXXXX XXXXXXX: Yes.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. So long as the world knows what your party is about in respect of jobs and wealth in this country! Hon Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: You can get up and have your say! Hon Xxxxxx Xxxxx: And you play into their hands, the Labor Party; I can’t understand you! Hon Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx: Just let him give his speech! Hon Xxxxxx Xxxxx: One of these days people will learn about you! Xxx XXXXX XXXXXXX: Thank you.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. This is very helpful when he votes against these things. Xxx XXXXX XXXXXXX: Our party fundamentally does not believe that we should lock away, in essence, agreements of this nature over a term that is in many cases 63 years with a revolving door of 21, 21 and 21, because in this day and age we really do need to understand that once the government has established a state agreement act, unless there is agreement between the proponent and the government of the day to change that agreement, it is locked and loaded forever and a day. Situations change over time; they are not constant. Quite clearly, we have seen in previous state agreement acts in which we had written that after 13 years we would move to downstream processing that, at the end of the day, we have no downstream processing because the company and the government came to a subsequent agreement that they would change the essence of the agreement without any referral back to the Parliament in any way, shape or form, because it is merely an agreement that we have ratified that can be modified by the corporation and the government at any time in the future. I think that all of us when reading the early agreement acts were really excited by the notion that our iron ore, our petroleum, our gold, our nickel and our silver were going to be turned into product in Western Australia, rather than continually be sold off overseas. This particular state agreement act deals with a railway line, but there are many other aspects that I want to touch on. I will touch on not only the rail line but also Aboriginal heritage, the ownership of the line, the Xxx Xxxx issues, with which we have dealt in part, and then just generally state agreement acts.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. It’s going to be done under the Mining Act; we already told you that.
Hon XXXXXX XXXXX. I read the newspapers assiduously every day and listen to the news and I always hear about some Green party opposing every development that is suggested. If we work our way down the coast and