In The Press

Echo (21/2/09) After it all they get a gantry

I wouldn't want Echo readers to miss out on Western Power's latest blunder in the Eastern Terminal Substation debacle. In the Echo January 3, Western Power published an advert on page 14 advising their final decision on the Hackett's Gully bodge.


Hills Gazette (14/2/09) Power gantry poses fire risk

We are all angered by arsonists in the east, and with good reason. We should also be angry with Western Power's decision to locate its gantry in the extreme bush fire risk area of Hacketts Gully. Should a fire occur in that area, either through its construction or its operation, then the densely populated area of Kalamunda Hills will no doubt face the same fate.


Echo (10/1/09) No other option for terminal

Western Power has met with a community focus group to discuss phase one of the Powering Perth"s communities project.


Hills Gazette (6/12/08) Power consult plan sparks protests

Action groups have described Western Power's latest attempt at community consultation over the Powering Perth's Communities project as a sham and a farce. Gary Warden, spokesman for the Hills Climate Action Group, and Alan Lonsdale, spokesperson for the SETS group, have come out in protest over the focus group meeting held last Saturday in Kalamunda.


Echo (Nov 08) - Focus Group discusses Terminal Project

Western Power has met with a community focus group to discuss phase one of the Powering Perth"s communities project.


Hills Gazette (25/10/08) - Project unplugs Shire Ire

Kalamunda Shire Council moved an urgent motion at its meeting on Monday over the latest development in Western Power's controversial Powering Perth's Communities project.


Echo (25/10/08) - Eastern Terminal Project renamed

Western Power have announced a new name for the former Eastern Terminal project, saying the change was needed to reflect a new approach.


Hills Gazette (06/09/08) - Mixed Views on Terminal

Candidates contesting Hills seats have outlined a range of views on Western Power's proposed Eastern Terminal.


Hills Gazette (16/08/08) Win for Power Protest

A group fighting the construction of an electrical switchyard in the Hills is celebrating after Western Power announced it would take the project back to the drawing board....


Echo (16/08/08) Terminal discussed at meeting

Western Power's General Manager in Customer Services Mark de Laeter addressed the Shire of Kalamunda's Planning and Services Committee regarding the proposed Eastern Terminal switchyard. Over 80 people filled the chamber to demonstrate their disapproval of Western Power's lack of community consultation...


Hills Gazette (July 2008) Walk Trail damaged

Western Power has admitted two of its contractors damaged areas of a walking trail in Kalamunda during recent maintenance.


Hills Gazette (28/06/08) Substation in activists firing line

A newly formed group of Hills climate activists will fight the proposed construction of the eastern terminal electricity substation.


Hills Gazette (28/06/08) Tsunami of salt is a real killer

...Lo and behold on the same page is a big advertisement - an invitation from Western Power. The subject is basically land clearing for its new power line.


Hills Gazette (24/05/08) - Sparks fly over switch

Western Power have conceded they should have provided Hills residents with clearer information about the development of an Eastern Terminal Substation.


Hills Gazette (19/04/08) - Fears over power plan

A group opposing Western Power's plans to build an eastern terminal substation in the Hills fear the community will not receive a fair hearing during the next round of consultation.


Hills Gazette Letter to the Editor (19/04/08) - Why the change?

"I note with interest that Ian Buchanan from Western Power (Geologist's ideas rejected, Gazette, April 5) confirmed the southeastern terminal and the recommissioning of the transmission line are required in addition to the eastern terminal..."


The West Australian (17/04/08) - Plan to build more coal power stations

Coal magnate Rick Stowe is planning to capitalise on the high price of domestic gas by spending up to $1.2 billion building 3 new power stations in a move that will put further pressure on the WA Government's greenhouse targets.


Hills Gazette (05/04/08) - Geologist's idea rejected

Western Power has rejected a suggestion from a Hills Geologist that its planned eastern terminal substation is unnecessary.


Hills Gazette (29/03/08) - Hacketts Gully plea

Kalamunda Shire Council wants the State Government to extend Kalamunda National Park to incorporate an area of the state forest at Hacketts Gully.


Hills Gazette Letter to the Editor (29/03/08) - Residents must be consulted

"I am very concerned at Western Power's announcement of the building of a gantry on Mundaring Weir Road and upgrade of the existing 132,0000 volt line between Boddington and this new gantry."


Hills Gazette (22/03/08) - Council speaks out on station

Kalamunda Shire Council has expressed its intense opposition to the area Western Power is studying as a site for a planned eastern terminal substation.


Hills Gazette (15/03/08) - Calls to Delay Plan

A group opposed to Western Power's proposed eastern terminal substation in the Hills has urged energy minister Francis Logan to halt construction of a temporary gantry structure planned for Hacketts Gully.


Hills Gazette (01/03/08) - Group to fight for land

Tourism operators in the Hills have joined forces to fight Western Power's plans to build an eastern terminal substation in the Hills.


Hills Gazette Letter to the Editor (01/03/08) - Western Power plot thickens - Mr John Davenport, Bickley

"I note that Mr de Laeter claims the main reason for a "hills connection" to the metropolitan grid is because of new power stations being built at Collie".


Hills Gazette Letter to the Editor (23/02/08) - Home not yet chosen for ET - Mr Mark de Laete, General Manager, Customer Services, Western Power

"In response to the letter from John Davenport from Bickley, published in the February 16 issue, I assure residents that Western Power has not chosen a location for the proposed Eastern Terminal (ET) substation."


Hills Gazette Letter to the Editor (16/02/08) - Stealth at work over project - Mr John Davenport, Bickley

"Western Power's announcement of the reconstruction of the Collie to Hacketts Gully transmission line strongly suggests that it has chosen a site for the eastern terminal in the Hacketts Gully area."


# Hills Gazette (09/02/08) - People power ignored

An action group fighting the construction of an electricity substation in the Hills believes Western Power has no interest in consulting the community over a site.


Hills Gazette (15/12/07) - Substation put on backburner

Opponents to a proposed electrical terminal substation in the Hills have won a 12 month reprieve, with Western Power this week announcing it needs more time to consult the community.


Echo Newspaper (14/11/07) - Shire seeks consultation

Kalamunda Shire Council will request a consultation with Western Power on the proposal for the new Eastern Sub Terminal.


Hills Gazette (10/11/07) - Substation fight on

Opposition is mounting against Western Power's proposed Eastern Terminal Substation in the Hills.


Echo Newspaper (10/11/07) - Terminal Call

Darling Range MLA John Day has called for the State Government to listen to concerns of local residents about a new terminal substation to be constructed in the Kalamunda District.


Kalgoorlie Miner (Oct 07) - Threat to goldfields water

Goldfields drinking water could be at risk of contamination if a proposed Western Power substation is established in Kalamunda, according to Kalamunda Shire Councillor Frank Lindsay.


Echo Newspaper (Oct 07) - Substation site up for discussion

Residents will take an active role in the selection of a site for a new $180 million terminal substation in the Kalamunda-Mundaring area, according to Western Power.


Hills Gazette (29/05/99) - Substation opposed

Kalamunda Shire Council will "vehemently" oppose a bid by Western Power to build a substation near Mundaring Weir Road in Hacketts Gully.


SETS Supporters Update

by John Davenport 2/15/2010 12:59:00 PM

We urge our supporters to complete Western Power's surveyClick on the "Take our online survey" link once you get to Western Power's website.

Here is the direct link to the survey.

Western Power’s Proposed 330kV South West Transmission Reinforcement and the Eastern Terminal.

After the 29th November 2008 ‘focus group’ workshop held at the Jack Healey centre and attended by only 12 ‘locals’, Western Power issued, on 20th December, an ‘Invitation for Submissions for the Proposed 330kV South West Transmission Reinforcement’. The Western Power documents detailing this proposal contain 9 options for alternative reinforcements and can be viewed on Western Power’s website.( Project updates/Powering Perth Communities/Project History/Hacketts Gully)

Western Power received 16 submissions;

(i)    5 came from individuals opposed to various aspects of the proposal
(ii)    11 came from government, business and private organizations.
            Of these only 3 supported the proposal. These included Griffin Energy,
            the main beneficiary of the line upgrade, the Bunbury Economic Alliance
            and the Independent Market Operator (IMO), whose energy projections
            had been used by Western Power to support the proposal.
            Alinta stated it had no alternative suggestions
            Dept of Water stated that the existing line prevented access to its assets
            for maintenance and therefore reserved the right to require relocation of
            the proposed line route.

Of the remainder

             Office of Energy criticised various aspects of Western Power’s analysis
             and concluded that the alternative Landwehr to South East Terminal at
             Oldbury may provide greater opportunities for low emission technologies
             and co-generation.
             Aviva Corporation voiced concern that the proposal reinforced existing
             transmission infrastructure imbalance favouring south west generation and
             that this discounted new generation developments in the Mid West region.
             ERM could not agree with some of the statements and conclusions used
             to support Western Power’s contention that the proposal is needed to
             ensure a competitive generation market. It argued that the need is for
             ‘peak generation’ closer to the Perth market and that carbon pollution
              reduction schemes will make gas-fired generation more competitive than
              coal-fired generation. It argued that the reliability of the SWIS will be
              improved through generation capacity north of Perth.
              Synergy pointed out that the assumptions used by Western Power and its
              consultants ACIL Tasman & SKM do not reflect the current energy
              demand outlook. Moreover, it did not consider plant located north of
              Perth and that this area would be the location of significant renewable
              energy generation. Synergy concluded, ’there is no immediate need for
              augmentation, the opportunity afforded by deferring this decision will
              allow reflection on what is required and when. This deferral will also
              avoid an unnecessary cost impost on network users in these difficult
              times and relieve pressure on the state government’s debt requirement’
              Hills Climate Change Group  opposed the proposal for a number of
              reasons including carbon emission implications for coal-fired generation
              on the environment and climate change; and because much of the data
              used in Western Power’s decision is superceded by the global downturn.
              SETS Group submission  opposed Western Power’s preferred
              option 8 establishing a new 330kV transmission line from Collie to
              Hacketts Gully. Among a number of inconsistencies the analysis SETS
              noted ACIL Tasman’s variance with Western Power over the
              implications of Option 8, that being that ACIL Tasman stated that
              the Eastern Terminal will be located to the south at Byford and        
              referred to as the South East Terminal.
              SETS Group submission supported the Landwehr options.

On January 29, 2009, without any endorsement from the ‘focus group’ workshop, Western Power announced that it would proceed with the construction of a ‘gantry tie-in solution’ at Hacketts Gully.

On 28 January 2009 Western Power released a document called ‘Environmental & Social Review of the Line Routes: Landwehr to South East Terminal, Wells Terminal to Hacketts Gully’ (Available on Western Power’s website: Project updates/Powering Perth Communities/ Project History/related downloads/Environment & Social Review)

This review was based on a desk top study and only deals with the most superficial aspects of the 2 proposals, and rather than containing full environmental & social impact studies contains a number of subjective opinions such as; ’The State Forest has comparatively low conservation values…’ There is no discussion of the environmental impacts of the construction process despite the 90 km Wells to Hacketts Gully line  passing through a State Forest (80 hectares of which will be cleared for the Wells to Hacketts Gully line) susceptible to Phytophthora disease and 87.7 kms of the line being in Priority 1 Water Catchments of the Mundaring Weir, Middle Helena, Canning, Serpentine and South Dandalup Dams.

The SETS Group submission, dated 4th February, argues that Option 8 (Wells to Hacketts Gully) should be rejected on environmental and social grounds. The submission also raises the matter of an increase in fire risk for the community adjoining the State Forest, either trough line malfunction, lightening strike or misuse of the corridor by off-road vehicles.

May 2009  State Budget;

No allocation was provided for Western Power’s South West Transmission Line Reinforcement or the Eastern Terminal proposal in the State’s May Budget.

On the 23rd June, 2009 Western Power released ‘Assessment of impacts associated with the Wells to Hacketts Gully 330kV transmission line’ 

This document related to the granting of a permit (dated 12 February 2008) to clear native vegetation under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 for the purposes of upgrading Western Power’s South West Interconnected System (SWIS). It called for submissions ‘on the proposal to upgrade a section of the existing Guildford to Boddington 132kV line to a 330kV capacity from Wells Terminal near Boddington to Hacketts Gully’

Both the Shire of Kalamunda (letter dated 22 July, 2009) and SETS Group made representations on the Western Power document. The SETS Group submission opposed the use of the clearing permit for the line reconstruction for the following reasons:
(1)    The results of such clearing are at variance with 8 of the 10 permit principles.
(2)    It will contradict the guidelines for land use in all Priority 1 areas of the PDWSA’s and will seriously compromise water management strategy during and after the line reconstruction. [Note that the proposed 90 km line traverses 87.7km of Priority 1 area through the Middle Helena, Mundaring Weir, Serpentine Dam, Canning River and South Dandalup catchments]
(3)    The resulting line will increase the risk of fire, both from line mishaps and illegal vehicle activity, to an unacceptable level and consequence for the catchments and the adjacent communities.
(4)    It will increase the risk of the spread of dieback in the State Forest during construction and that no management strategy can entirely eliminate that risk. This is unacceptable given the fragile state of the forest.
(5)     Any clearing of the State Forest is unacceptable.    

To date, December 2009, nothing further has been publicly released to indicate any further advancement of the project, though it is interesting to note that the alternative option, Landwehr to South East Terminal, which was rejected by both Western Power and its consultants ACIL Tasman, has now been listed as a project for the South West Integrated System augmentation!

It is also interesting to note that the initial reason given for the new line (Wells to Hacketts Gully) was the need to supply ‘peak demand power’ for airconditioners in the northern suburbs. Last week (3rd December) the Minister for Energy opened the new open cycle gas-fired 320 mw Neerabup Power Station north of Wanneroo to do just that!

The SETS Group thank ALL our supporters for their help and interest in this vital matter.

We urge our supporters to complete Western Power's surveyClick on the "Take our online survey" link once you get to Western Power's website.

Here is the direct link to the survey.

Currently rated 1.5 by 39 people

  • Currently 1.461537/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Site Selection Update | Powering Perths Communities | Site Selection Update

Western Power Fails Again

by Alan Lonsdale 11/26/2008 9:22:00 AM


Media Statement 25 November 2008

Western Power’s latest attempt to engage the community in consultation has, like all previous attempts, run into difficulties.  As reported previously in the Hills Gazette (25/10/08), Western Power called for nominations for a focus group to work with it on the first stage of the controversial Powering Perth Communities project, previously known as the Eastern Terminal project. 

The focus group would assist Western Power to select a preferred option for a “tie-in”, which would connect to the metropolitan network a new 330 kV line from Collie to the Perth Hills.  The “tie-in” would be located in Hacketts Gully, the site of Western Power’s previous failed attempt to locate the Eastern Terminal, and of the gantry structure proposed early in 2008.

However, Western Power’s plans for the focus group have already changed.  Due to the lack of response from the community to nominate for the group, Western Power announced that the three focus group sessions scheduled for 15 November, 29 November and 6 December would be cancelled.  In their place a single full day workshop is now planned for 29 November. 

The focus group exercise was roundly condemned by Kalamunda Shire Council at its October meeting and by the action group opposed to Western Power’s proposed Eastern Terminal.  The revised focus group exercise is Western Power’s fifth attempt at community consultation, the first four having failed. 

The Stop the Eastern Terminal Action Group (SETS Group) is dismayed that Western Power has embarked on the latest exercise in contradiction of assurances given by Mark de Laeter, Western Power’s General Manager, Customer Services.  In an address to Kalamunda Shire Council on 11 August, Mr de Laeter acknowledged that Western Power’s previous community consultation attempts had failed and promised a ‘fresh start’.  The ‘fresh start’ would involve working with the community in ‘open book’ style, and agreement with the community on an ‘engagement model’ for consultation. 

 “This latest move by Western Power breaks these promises”, said Dr Alan Lonsdale, spokesperson for the SETS group.  “There has been no consultation with the community about an ‘engagement model’.”  “The new focus group exercise is seriously flawed – because participation is limited to a selected few chosen by Western Power, it disenfranchises virtually all members of the community, and prohibits environmental and other community groups from participating fully.”  “It is certainly not ‘open book’ style.”

In particular, the SETS Group is worried that a decision now concerning a “tie-in” in Hacketts Gully will constrain options for phase 2 of the Powering Perth Communities project.  “The second phase is to involve the selection of a site for a switchyard, or possibly a terminal substation.  Further down the track the community may discover that there is no alternative but to locate this in Hacketts Gully.  It is essential that Western Power fully informs the community now of the factors involved in its planning”, said Dr Lonsdale.  “Western Power’s latest attempt at community consultation is seriously flawed”, he said.

Currently rated 1.4 by 15 people

  • Currently 1.4/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Community Meetings | Gantry | In the Press | Powering Perths Communities | Site Selection Update

Kalamunda Shire Council's submission to Western Power on the Site Selection Process

by Claire 8/19/2008 8:06:00 PM

On Monday 18th August the Kalamunda Shire Council considered a submission from the Shire to Western Power in relation to the site selection process.

Although the last date for submissions passed on 31 July the Council had arranged an extension.   

The submission was passed unanimously.  The submission is reproduced below, and makes very strong statements about the proposed Eastern Terminal, the proposed gantry, the site selection process, "no-go" areas,  and the need for open public consultation.




The Shire of Kalamunda has been involved in consultation with Western Power and its predecessors concerning the proposed Eastern Terminal substation since 1992.  The Shire has consistently opposed the proposal that an Eastern Terminal substation be located in state forest or water catchment areas to the east of Kalamunda.

During this period Council established a policy of ‘vehement opposition’ to the proposal.  Council understood that the issues had been resolved in May 2002 when Western Power wrote to the community of Hacketts Gully stating:

“Following a review of the long term electrical load requirements for the east metropolitan area, we wish to advise that a terminal substation will no longer required at Location 3897 Mundaring Weir Road, Hacketts Gully. We also have no intention to acquire an alternative site in areas close to Hacketts Gully as previously advised. The site at Location 3897 Mundaring Weir Road will be either disposed of or held as an environmental/conservation asset to be traded at some time in the future. Western Power has not intention to sell the land to a private developer[1].”

1.1     Council is greatly concerned that Western Power is now attempting to renege on its 2002 promises to the residents of Hacketts Gully.

Council remains opposed to Western Power’s Eastern Terminal proposal.  On 17 March 2008 Council unanimously adopted a motion that the Kalamunda Shire Council:

  1. expresses its vehement opposition to siting of the substation within the study area designated by Western Power as it consists mainly of Priority 1 & Priority 2 water catchment areas, National Park and State Forest, and consequently is unacceptable on environmental, economic and social grounds,
  2. expresses its vehement opposition to the announcement by Western Power of the 7 February 2008 that it is intending to construct a gantry structure near the intersection of Mundaring Weir Road and Bahen Road, Hacketts Gully, without any prior consultation with either the Council or affected residents in Hacketts Gully.

1.2    Council remains vehemently opposed to an Eastern Terminal and the proposed gantry structure in Hacketts Gully on environmental, social and economic grounds.


The Shire of Kalamunda has adhered to the terms of the ‘Water Management Strategy’ in Public Drinking Water Source Areas when considering development applications in Priority 1, 2 & 3 areas.  The Eastern Terminal study area encompasses all three Priority areas and falls within the Mundaring, Middle Helena and Victoria catchments.  As a consequence, use of land in these areas has been restricted in terms of the number and types of animals, the secondary processing of farm, orchard and vineyard produce and the imposition of housing envelopes on subdivided land so that water quality is preserved.

Council notes that under the ‘Water Management Strategy’ the category of ‘energy industry’ is incompatible.  Council also notes that recent announcements by the Water Corporation confirm Mundaring Weir as one of three key catchment areas in the Perth metropolitan area[2].

2.1     Council believes the construction of an Eastern Terminal in this area of State Forest and Priority 1 & 2 water catchments will set an unacceptable precedent and seriously undermine Council’s attempts to implement its strategy to secure water quality in the catchments.


The Shire’s strategic plan places particular value on the environment, ecotourism as an important economic driver, and the importance of the natural environment for recreation.

The proposed Eastern Terminal – whether as a switchyard or substation – would have a strong negative impact on these values.

The ‘gantry’ structure would have a major visible impact on the important tourist route which connects Kalamunda to the Mundaring Weir, Lake C.Y.O’Connor, the O’Connor Museum, the Hills Forest Centre and the Bibbulmun and Munda Biddi Trails and, in turn, on the recreational amenity of these areas.

In May 2008 Tourism W.A. stated:[3]

  1. Perth Hills area has been identified as an emerging tourism destination within the Experience Perth Destination Development Strategy 2007-2017.
  2. Tourism development in the Perth Hills destination is seen as strategically important as the Perth Hills product has direct synergy with three of the five iconic tourism experiences used to position Western Australia in the marketplace. (These include Forest & Flowers, Wine & Food, people & Lifestyle).
  3. The Bibbulmun Track and the Munda Biddi Trail hold iconic significance at a State level and form an important component of marketing Western Australia at a strategic level. 

3.1     Council believes the Eastern Terminal & ‘gantry’ proposals would undermine the tourism strategies of the Shire of Kalamunda and Tourism W.A. 


Pages 2-5 of the May 2008 Site Selection Process Paper outline Western Power’s plans for the construction of an Eastern Terminal switchyard.  Council is greatly concerned that in all previous information, including the briefing of Planning Services Committee on 10 December 2007, Western Power has consistently referred to an Eastern Terminal substation.  Despite Mr de Laeter’s presentation to Planning Services Committee on 11 August 2008, the reasons for the change are not clear, either to Council or to the community.  There continues to be very substantial community confusion concerning Western Power’s intentions, particularly given Western Power’s stated intention to acquire an area of 20 hectares, the area required for a substation.

Council is aware that Western Power proposes upgrading to 132 kV the 66 kV line which traverses Hacketts Gully and Paulls Valley.  It is assumed that should this occur, transformers would be required to convert 330 kV power to 132 kV, requiring the first stage of a substation.

4.1     The confusion that Western Power has created in the minds of the community as a result of its inconsistent descriptions of this project has significantly compromised the integrity of the consultation process, and raises serious questions about the adequacy of Western Power’s planning.

4.2     Council believes that, in assessing the potential long-term impact of the proposal, because of the uncertainty concerning the eventual development of an Eastern Terminal, Council must assume that it may ultimately comprise an Eastern Terminal substation; until such time that an unequivocal assurance is provided by Western Power that this is not the case.


The description in the Site Selection Process Paper of the proposed site selection process is confusing, and is expressed in language that would not readily be understood by many people.  Those unfamiliar with the background to the Eastern Terminal proposal would have found it difficult to make informed comments about the process.  Council notes that of the 600 submissions received, only 37 were concerned with the process.  It is suggested that this is reflective of (a) the strength of community opposition to an Eastern Terminal, (b) the likelihood that many respondents were not prepared to comment on a site selection process as they were opposed to an Eastern Terminal anywhere in the study area, and (c) difficulty in understanding and commenting on the proposed process.

The Site Selection Process Paper identifies the following as “no-go” areas in which an Eastern Terminal would not be constructed: Reservoir Protection Zones; a buffer around the Perth Observatory; National Parks; and a 500 metre buffer around residential areas.  Council notes that following the exclusion of these areas the remaining area of interest would consist wholly of Priority 1 and 2 water catchment. 

5.1     Council believes that the following MUST ALSO be designated as “no-go” areas:

a)   the locality of Hacketts Gully in its entirety;

b)   all Priority 1 and 2 water catchment areas;

c)   a buffer of at least 500 metres on each side of the Bibbulmun Track, the Munda Biddi Track, the Lower Helena Bridle Trail, Kalamunda Circuit and The Dell picnic area, consistent with Western Power’s proposed setbacks for private property;

d)   all Environmentally Sensitive Areas as defined by the Department of Environment and Conservation; and

e)   a buffer of at least 1000 m (rather than 500 m) around all residential areas.

5.2     Council believes the threat of Phythophthera die back disease means that any development involving the clearing of forest in the study poses an unacceptable risk. 

Council is greatly concerned that while the Site Selection Process Paper proposes the application of sustainability principles to the selection of a specific site, the decision by Western Power to locate an Eastern Terminal within the study area was based only on economic and technical criteria. 

5.3     Council believes it is essential that, to ensure consistent decision making and to convince the community that Western Power is genuine in its use of sustainability principles, the decision to locate an Eastern Terminal east of Kalamunda must be reconsidered, using the sustainability principles proposed for the site selection process.


Council is greatly concerned that, given the level of confusion in the community about Western Power’s intentions, the Site Selection Process Paper makes no provision for open community consultation through public meetings.  The Paper refers only to “information sessions during the Site Options Discussion Paper comment period to explain the sites identified.”  Community members who were not invited to the 2007 workshops but who have been included in the 2008 process will be seriously disadvantaged.  Community members and organisations will find it difficult to participate in the proposed site selection process if they have a confused or incorrect understanding of Western Power’s plans.  

6.1     Council believes it is essential that open information sessions are conducted as soon as possible to properly inform the community of the latest proposals for an Eastern Terminal.  Without such opportunities, Western Power’s community consultation process will be fundamentally flawed.

[1] Letter from Mr R Teh of WPC, 9th May, 2002

[2]  ‘The West Australian’ 22 July 2008

[3]  Letter to Perth Hills Vignerons Association 27 May 2008

Currently rated 1.7 by 21 people

  • Currently 1.666666/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Site Selection Update | Site Selection Update

600 Public Submissions on the Site Selection Process Paper

by Claire 8/16/2008 10:55:00 AM
The period for public comment on this paper ended on 31 July.   Thankyou to everyone who submitted a comment. 

Mark De Laeter in his address to the council indicated that there had been 600 submissions from members of the public in the recent round of public comment on the "site selection process". 

As a result of the huge community opposition to the project, Western Power have now announced a "fresh start" on Eastern Terminal. Well done!

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Site Selection Update