Western Australia’s environmental regulator and a prominent Perth property developer have found themselves defending a controversial tourism development project in the state’s South West region, as criticism over the decision continues to mount. The project, a $280 million venture slated for Smiths Beach near Yallingup, approximately 265 kilometres south of Perth, received a recommendation for approval from the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) last month, despite significant community apprehension.
The development, spearheaded by Perth-based property developer Adrian Fini, is slated to proceed under a series of stringent conditions designed to minimise its environmental footprint. However, the City of Busselton has since lodged a forceful appeal against the EPA’s recommendation. The council contends that the authority has permitted the developer to downplay the projected impact on the pristine natural beauty and visual amenity of Smiths Beach.
In a publicly released letter, Busselton Chief Executive Garry Hunt articulated the council’s stance, stating, “This appeal is based on departures by the EPA from its own objectives and functions, and its failure to have proper regard to the Statement of Environmental Principles.” The Conservation Council has since echoed these sentiments, offering similar criticisms regarding the watchdog’s assessment methodologies.
Further scrutiny has been directed at the perceived connections between EPA board members and developers. Notably, the Chair Darren Walsh, Deputy Chair Jane Bennett, and members David Caddy and Hamish Beck all declared conflicts of interest pertaining to the Smiths Beach proposal. An EPA spokesperson clarified these conflicts, noting they stem from “involvement and knowledge of the assessment in previous employment, and/or professional association with the proponent.”
The fate of the project now rests with the Appeals Convenor, Eve Drain, with the final decision to be made by Environment Minister Matthew Swinbourn.
Developer Asserts “Rigorous Work” Underpins Project
A spokesperson for the Fini Group’s Smith’s Beach Project Team issued a statement asserting the extensive efforts undertaken to support the development. “We have provided more technical documentation and analysis completed by experts in the field to support our application than for any other project we have done,” the spokesperson stated. “We have been open and transparent throughout the process.”
The developer emphasised that the technical assessments submitted in support of the project have undergone thorough review and approval by the EPA. They also pledged a commitment to collaborate with the watchdog to resolve any outstanding concerns.
Public Confidence in the Watchdog Questioned
The intensity of the City of Busselton’s critique in its appeal letter has surprised even those locally opposed to the project. David Mitchell, spokesperson for the Smiths Beach Action Group, described the council’s letter as “really blistering and scathing, both of the project itself and how the EPA has conducted their assessment.”
However, the most profound concerns revolve around the broader question of public trust in the environmental regulator. “We’ve got an EPA that’s directly linked to development, and they’re departing from their own principles,” Mr Mitchell observed. He further questioned the shift in the EPA’s stance since 2009, when a similar development in the same locale was rejected, and what action the minister would take.
Broader Context of Contested Developments
The Smiths Beach proposal is not an isolated case. The current Cook government’s agenda includes other politically and locally contentious projects, such as the proposed Burswood racetrack and plans for a ferry terminal at Matilda Bay, some of which have either been approved or have not undergone full assessment by the EPA in recent months.
Libby Mettam, the local Member for Vasse and a former Liberal leader, expressed significant alarm regarding the reported relationships between EPA board members and developers. “This smashes public confidence when it comes to the EPA,” the Liberal frontbencher stated. She highlighted the anomaly of a decision being made that appears to contradict the EPA’s own independent advice. “What is currently being proposed … ignores state planning policy, previous rulings and independent peer review.”
Piers Verstegen, an environmental campaigner and now consultant, pointed to a widespread unease. “It’s not just environmental groups raising the usual issues, but across the community there seems to be a level of concern I have not seen before, even under previous governments,” he commented.
EPA Defends Its Processes and Record
In response to the growing criticism, the EPA issued a statement to the ABC, asserting the effectiveness of its conflict of interest management procedures. “The EPA exercises a high degree of care and caution when it considers potential conflicts of interest,” a spokesperson affirmed. “Seeking independent probity advice on potential and perceived conflicts is also a standard part of the EPA’s conflict of interest procedures.”
The spokesperson confirmed that four EPA members, including the chair, had declared conflicts of interest regarding the Smiths Beach proposal and consequently recused themselves from its assessment.
The EPA also indicated that it had acknowledged and actively sought to address community concerns surrounding Smiths Beach. “It was this strong community connection that led EPA members to visit the site and meet members of the Smiths Beach Action Group to hear concerns,” the spokesperson explained. “During this same visit, the EPA also met City of Busselton staff to gain further insight into their key issues.”
Environment Minister Matthew Swinbourn declined to provide comment, citing the ongoing appeals process.
