Senator Allison asked the Minister for the Environment, upon notice, on 24 October 1996:

(1) Is the Minister aware that the National Report for Australia to the Ramsar Conference in Brisbane in March 1996 pointed to `ongoing public concern about the potential threats to the ecological character of the Western Port Bay Ramsar site' from the proposal by Shell and Mobil to import through Crib Point and from other shipping activities in the bay.

(2) Has the Australian Nature Conservation Agency received a letter from the Secretary General of the Ramsar Wetland Convention in Geneva asking whether, in the light of detailed information provided to the Ramsar Bureau on this proposed escalation of oil handling and on other threats to the bay, the site should be included on the Montreux record.

(3) Has a response been made to the Secretary General's request; if no response has been made, what response is intended and when.

(4) With reference to the fact that the report of the Review Group on the response to the Iron Baron oil spill (January 1996) reveals that only 7.5 tonnes (or 2.3 per cent) of the 325 tonnes spilt was recovered from the sea, and given that this amounts to 97.7 per cent ineffectiveness of the National Oil Spill Plan for a comparatively small spill, (but is not surprising given that recoveries of more than 10 per cent are unusual in the world for spills near coastlines or in enclosed waters): In view of this lamentable failure, how can the national plan to combat pollution of the sea by oil as it applies to Western Port Bay (or the related, Australian Marine Safety Authority approved, Shell-Mobil oil spill prevention and response plan) be regarded as providing adequate protection of the important wetland values of the bay for which the Australian Government has responsibilities under the Ramsar, JapanAustralia Migratory Birds Agreement and China-Australia Migratory Birds Agreement treaties.

(5) (a) Did the Minister, in May 1996, meet with community representatives on Phillip Island and was the Minister presented with both on-site evidence and documentary evidence (so far completely unchallenged) to indicate the ecological sensitivity of Western Port Bay for the importation of crude oil; and (b) what steps have been taken to meet these concerns.

(6) Is the Minister aware that, whilst the Shell-Mobil project is still on hold (although fully approved by both State and Federal Governments and open implementation at any time), the importation of refined spirit by another company (Wickland) through the Crib Point jetty has been allowed to proceed despite the community's long-standing and well-documented concerns and requests for an open inquiry.

(7) Is the Minister aware that, in March 1994, the Council of the (former) Shire of Hastings resolved unanimously `That in light of existing decisions of the State Government not to require an EES/EIS for the project, the PMA and the Federal Government be requested to require that an EES/EIS be prepared for the Crib Point Terminal and other current and future oil and refined product importation projects within Western Port Bay before these facilities come into operation, as highlighted by Council's review and suggested in earlier port planning studies conducted by the PMA', and that the recommendations made at this time by Hastings

Council have subsequently been supported by its successor, the Mornington Peninsula Shire Council, in correspondence to the previous Minister for the Environment.

(8) In light of the strong expressions of both local government and community concern, and bearing in mind the Government's Ramsar and other obligations, what inquiries or actions regarding the Wickland operation have been undertaken by the Commonwealth Government.

Senator Hill —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows:

(1) Yes. The quote referred to in the question is taken from Appendix 1 of Australia's National Report to the Sixth Ramsar Conference. The quote was based on comments by non-government organisations consulted when the report was being prepared.

(2) The Australian Nature Conservation Agency (ANCA) received a letter from the Secretary General of the Ramsar Convention Bureau on 5 July 1996, regarding the possible inclusion of Western Port Bay on the Montreux Record.

(3) I discussed the issue of Western Port Bay with staff of the Ramsar Bureau when I visited there on 16 July 1996.

(4) In recognition of the environmental values to Western Port Bay, I have requested that my Department provide me with advice on options, which the Commonwealth could consider, to assist the Victorian Government with their future management of oil handling in that State.

(5) (a) Yes

(b) I am currently receiving advice on the best way to respond to the concerns.

(6) Yes. I am aware that the Wickland proposal was assessed under the EPIP Act in February of this year and that no EIS or PER was required.

(7) My Department received correspondence dated 22 March 1994 from the Westernport and Peninsula Protection Council Inc attaching a copy of the resolution from the Hastings Shire Council calling for the Federal Government to conduct an EIA. My Department has no records of the former Minister for the Environment receiving a subsequent letter from the Mornington Peninsula Shire Council on this issue.

(8) Please see answer to question 4 above.