Public Comment Process for Proposed New Rottnest Hotel
-
Author:
n/a -
Send To:
The Premier of Western Australia
-
Sponsored By:
Members of the Rottnest Society -
More Info at:
This petition of certain members of the Western Australian public draws to your attention the refusal of the current Minister for Tourism, the Hon. Sheila McHale MLA to honour a written commitment given by her predecessor, the Hon. Mark McGowan MLA, to make the recently announced concept plans for a hotel development at Mt Herschel on Rottnest Island available for a public comment period.
Although the current Ministers website does have a mechanism for readers of her media release to comment, this falls far short of the anticipated properly constituted public comment process. Mr. McGowans media release of 5th November 2005 titled 'Two New accommodation developments to attract more international visitors to Rotto', and subsequent meetings throughout 2006 with Mr. Paolo Amaranti, CEO of the Rottnest Island Authority, led members of the Rottnest Society to believe that there would be a public comment period for the proposed development at Mt Herschel.
Under the Rottnest Island Authority Act 1987 the Rottnest Island Authority is required to 'control and manage the Island in accordance with the management plan for the time being applicable to the Island'. The current Rottnest Island Management Plan (RIMP) 2003-2008 was available for public comment as required by Part IV 22 of the Act before it was formally gazetted.
The current RIMP does NOT include provision for a hotel at Mt Herschel. Moreover, RIMP recommendation 6.5.3.3 states that the RIA must 'Except where specified, limit construction of accommodation on Rottnest to the replacement of existing accommodation, as necessary' and of course the Act requires a focus on accommodation for local families {Part III, 12(1)(a)}.
The Rottnest Island Taskforce, established in 2003, made a series of recommendations for managing Rottnest which were largely accepted by the government but which have never been subjected to a public comment process. The Taskforce Report is not a gazetted statutory document and does not therefore supersede the RIMP.
The Western Australian public has, in 1984 and again in 2003 when major accommodation expansions were proposed, demonstrated a profound interest in any development at Rottnest and, in our opinion deserve, as a matter of good faith, to have the opportunity to have their say on a proposal of this magnitude.
Your petitioners therefore respectfully request that you urgently ask the Minister, the Hon. Sheila McHale to make the concept plans for the proposed Mt Herschel development available for a properly constituted public comment process.
Although the current Ministers website does have a mechanism for readers of her media release to comment, this falls far short of the anticipated properly constituted public comment process. Mr. McGowans media release of 5th November 2005 titled 'Two New accommodation developments to attract more international visitors to Rotto', and subsequent meetings throughout 2006 with Mr. Paolo Amaranti, CEO of the Rottnest Island Authority, led members of the Rottnest Society to believe that there would be a public comment period for the proposed development at Mt Herschel.
Under the Rottnest Island Authority Act 1987 the Rottnest Island Authority is required to 'control and manage the Island in accordance with the management plan for the time being applicable to the Island'. The current Rottnest Island Management Plan (RIMP) 2003-2008 was available for public comment as required by Part IV 22 of the Act before it was formally gazetted.
The current RIMP does NOT include provision for a hotel at Mt Herschel. Moreover, RIMP recommendation 6.5.3.3 states that the RIA must 'Except where specified, limit construction of accommodation on Rottnest to the replacement of existing accommodation, as necessary' and of course the Act requires a focus on accommodation for local families {Part III, 12(1)(a)}.
The Rottnest Island Taskforce, established in 2003, made a series of recommendations for managing Rottnest which were largely accepted by the government but which have never been subjected to a public comment process. The Taskforce Report is not a gazetted statutory document and does not therefore supersede the RIMP.
The Western Australian public has, in 1984 and again in 2003 when major accommodation expansions were proposed, demonstrated a profound interest in any development at Rottnest and, in our opinion deserve, as a matter of good faith, to have the opportunity to have their say on a proposal of this magnitude.
Your petitioners therefore respectfully request that you urgently ask the Minister, the Hon. Sheila McHale to make the concept plans for the proposed Mt Herschel development available for a properly constituted public comment process.
285 Signatures
-
Eeva-Liisa Pukkila-Fraser
- Post Code
- 6160
-
Nerissa
- Comments
- I Strongly disagree with the proposed development
- Post Code
- 6164
-
Sheryn Prior
- Comments
- Rottnest is a unique place, where people can experience something special. The Western Australian public has a strong connection with the Island, and the RIA Act supports this local ownership. I request that the public of Western Australia be given the opportunity to formally comment on the current proposal.
- Post Code
- 6015
-
Lois Achimovich
- Comments
- Pleae open the approval process to public debate
- Post Code
- 6160
-
Amanda Broome
- Comments
- You should not ignore the positive influence public consultation can have to a development
- Post Code
- 6230
-
Mark Daley
- Comments
- Its only fair to allow for Public comment
-
Lisa Lough
- Comments
- Rottnest Island is a special part of West Australians' lives. Please give us an opportunity to review and comment on any changes being proposed to our island.
- Post Code
- 6010
-
Tahnee Davies
- Comments
- I am dismayed that a proposal to totally change the social character of accomodation on Rottnest has been government sanctioned without any public consultation. Given all the past assurances that the Western Australian public will have an on-going say in what happens at Rottnest, it is outrageous that those assurances have now been disregarded.
- Post Code
- 6007
-
Suzanne Srdarov
- Post Code
- 6163
-
Sue Straiton
- Comments
- Class A reserve usurped by non transparent statutory bodies; Tourism WA, Landcorp, RIA and the LANDBANK SCHEME!
- Post Code
- 6014
-
Craig Beatson
- Post Code
- 6060
-
Toby Collins
- Comments
- Leave it alone. I have lived and worked on that island and it is becoming unreachable for the average man as it is. This shows that the rich win again at the expense of joe bloe and the environment. Keep it a jewel and subsidise accomodation for local Perthites. This generation of politicians aren't able or willing to protect the institutions that has made our state great. WA for sale.
- Post Code
- 3206
-
Kylie Sims
- Post Code
- 6102
-
Heidi Pecherczyk
- Post Code
- 6062
-
Elli Mutton
-
Norman Halse
- Comments
- The proposed development would mark a major change from the type of use for Rottnest which has been repeatedly supported by the Western Australian public.
-
Natasha Stone
- Comments
- Keep Rottnest as a Nature Reserve for all families to enjoy - stop developments now.
- Post Code
- 6010
-
Jen
- Post Code
- 6025
-
Mary Cairns
- Post Code
- 6021
-
Kym Del Casale
-
Leah Lyons
-
Nada Leonard
-
Harley Sears
-
Fiona Routledge
- Comments
- This type of development is inconsistent with the current feel of Rottnest Island
- Post Code
- 6154
-
Fay Gibbins
-
clint roberts
- Comments
- Public place requires public comments
- Post Code
- 6149
-
Lauren
- Post Code
- 6050
-
Kellie Ketteringham
- Post Code
- 6022
-
Stuart Porter
- Comments
- Lets keep Rottnest for everyone
- Post Code
- 6009
-
Jade
- Post Code
- 6148
-
George Foulsham
- Comments
- I am terribly frustrated and disappointed that this development is going ahead without any public comment. This island is the people's island. It must never become an exclusive millionaires' playground. The previous such development proposal some years back got the boot it deserved. If the people were given their democratic right to have a say again this development would cop the same treatment.
- Post Code
- 6012
-
Bree Morgan
-
Fiona Halse
- Post Code
- 6162
-
Anne Myres
- Post Code
- 6163
-
Michelle Walker
- Post Code
- 0871
-
Barry Beckett
- Comments
- There are democratic processes to observe for this kind of proposal. This has not been done for obvious reasons. Such a deception should be grounds for a resignation if not rectified. We, the people of WA have had our collective intelligence insulted. A public comment must be held and the outcome supported.
- Post Code
- 6065
-
Vanessa Rando
- Post Code
- 6076
-
Jessica Bargmann
- Post Code
- 6107
-
Daran swan
-
Greg Bargmann
- Comments
- A family holiday destination for the last 30 years.....don't muck it up!!
- Post Code
- 6076
-
Jean-Paul Orsini
- Comments
- I oppose commercial private tourism developments at Rottnest Islands
- Post Code
- 6010
-
Margot Penwarden
-
Kathleen Winter
- Comments
- Public should be consulted on proposals which will fundamentally change the face of the "Rottnest Experience". NO to resorts! Keep the family air of one of WA's most-loved destinations. Keep it cheap and accessible to all.
- Post Code
- 6100
-
Sarah Rich
- Post Code
- 6003
-
Eleanor Carney
- Comments
- The proposed development is likely to cause irreparable damage to an already fragile ecosystem and there is not sufficient water for a project of this size. Public consultation is urgently required
- Post Code
- 6101
-
Ciaran Sgherza
- Comments
- The opportunity for the public to comment on major developments is a very important part of the political process. In the case of Rottnest, the importance of public comment is increased as a result of the love that Western Australians have for the island. Thus, any promise to open the new development at Rottnest island to public comment should be honoured.
- Post Code
- 6136
-
Craig Wansbrough
- Comments
- We need a public comment process for the hotel concept plans!
- Post Code
- 6147
-
Matt Porter
- Comments
- We treated you in good faith in believing there would be a public comment period - shame!
-
Thomas Eric Moxham
- Comments
- Details of the proposed change to this most treasured WA holiday island must be released to allow public comment..
-
Mal Berrick
- Comments
- Public comments must be allowed
- Post Code
- 6055
-
285
Signatures! - View Signatures
- Sign Petition