Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I have never heard in recent times such a case of selective deafness. Did anybody else in this chamber hear me say, ‘We want that proposal to be moved; it is only a couple of hundred metres up to the joint venture site’? I have written—I did not say this just then but I said it earlier in the chamber—to each of the joint venturers asking them whether they agree to their site, that project, being co-located. I have received responses saying, ‘Yes, they’d be prepared to negotiate.’ Woodside have told me that they would be prepared to negotiate. I have written to the minister to ask him to facilitate that development. I called again in this chamber today for that compromise to be negotiated. I have not received an answer.

What I just heard was the minister saying that I am trying to close down that development. I am not. The Greens are not; we want it moved. Maitland may not be the answer. And by the way, Minister, you do not have to develop Maitland off West Intercourse Island; you can do it another way, and I have had other proponents tell me that. You can go to Onslow. But the most sensible place is 200 or 300 metres up from the current site—they want to develop it there. So please do not repeat that misconception that we are trying to stop this development. You have not answered my question. Perhaps I should pose the question: have you approached the joint venturers or sought to facilitate a meeting between Woodside and the North West Shelf joint venturers so that that plant can be co-located on that site and there would be a true win-win situation for rock art and for development?