To inform yourself on the situation, read the following link about the Coral Bay Developments. Summarised is that two years ago the State Government refused to allow a 400-bed development at nearby Maud's Landing on environmental grounds. The proposed site was 2.5 miles behind the reef; the new Hilton plan is 50 meters behind the reef.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200507/s1415661.htm

The whole situation leaves me skeptical as to our state government's role in the development. The Maud's development was denied on environmental grounds but passed a rigorous environmental assessment and was approved by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). I think these two following statements say enough about our premier's role; 'A spokesman for Geoff Gallop said the EPA may assess the project but the Government believed there was no comparison between the Hilton proposal and the Mauds Landing marina development.' On that basis, Geoff has decided that 'the controversial $60 million luxury resort planned for the sensitive Coral Bay area is unlikely to be scrutinised by the Environmental Protection Authority.'

http://www.thewest.com.au/20050719/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto131749.html

The following link are sections of the Coral Bay Development report and have a Location Plan, Site Plan, Aerial View & Cross Sections - Photo Montages Depicting Visual Impact of Development. Take into consideration the amount of time that it would have taken to prepare the information on the following site about the Hilton developments; has this project been in the works for a considerable period of time, even before Mauds was rejected? I think so.

http://www.carnarvon.wa.gov.au/latest_news/coral_bay_documents

Now: One passes environmental scrutiny by their own agency but is denied on environmental grounds. The other passes without environmental assessment and is over 20 times closer to the reef than the original project. What concerns me the most is that the Save Ningaloo campaign organised a mass campaign to stop the Maud's development but there hasn't been a peep out of them about the new Hilton plans. Now is this an organisation that is let loose when the government wants to promote its own ends? Sounds like a contra deal will have been struck behind closed doors; we'll give you your Marine Park increase from 10% to 34% of Ningaloo if you let the Hilton developments through without public demonstration. The decision to give the go ahead without an environmental analysis shows that Geoff Gallop isn’t concerned about the impact that a potential resort that close to the reef could have, or does he, as shown by the Maud’s decision?

http://www.saveningalooreef.org

 Read the reports and feel free to make your own judgements about this situation. Gallop’s decision may come down to the fact that the Hilton development may be the better suited to the Coral Bay area than the Maud’s proposal. How does it automatically gain favour without environmental consideration when the previous proposal was denied on those grounds. With the government turning the coastline into marine and national parks, the question begs to be asked weather this is the methodology that the premier is taking towards selecting which areas become protected? Environmental and Scientific research obviously doesn’t count for much and I’m sure that many of the current no fishing zones are being created by people who aren’t in touch with the sensitivity of the area and are banning large areas of Western Australia to fishing without considering the advice of professionals who understand the region.  Does one plan pass environmental scrutiny because it doesn't have a marina attached?  Is this the basis of the premier's decision not to assess the development?

All very interesting reading, the results will speak for themselves.