Legislative Assembly

Tuesday, 10 August 2010

THE SPEAKER (Mr G.A. Woodhams) took the chair at 2.00 pm, and read prayers. ARMADALE ELECTORAL DISTRICT — BY-ELECTION Statement by Speaker THE SPEAKER (Mr G.A. Woodhams): I advise members that today I received advice from His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor and Deputy of the Governor that he had received a letter from Hon Alannah MacTiernan, MLA, on Tuesday, 20 July 2010, submitting her resignation from her position as member for the electoral district of Armadale in the Western Australian Legislative Assembly in the following terms — Your Excellency I tender my resignation from the Legislative Assembly as member for the seat of Armadale in accordance with section 25 of the Constitution Acts Amendment Act 1899. Yours sincerely

Hon. Alannah MacTiernan MLA Member for Armadale 20 July 2010 I further advise that today I received advice from the Premier that on Friday, 6 August 2010, the Governor directed the Electoral Commissioner to proceed with an election in the Armadale electoral district. The writ lists the following dates for the purpose of the election—Friday, 20 August 2010, as the last day for the nomination of candidates; Saturday, 2 October 2010, as polling day; and Wednesday, 3 November 2010, as the last day for the return of the writ. COMMONWEALTH HEADS OF GOVERNMENT MEETING 2011 — PERTH Statement by Premier MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe — Premier) [2.03 pm]: In November 2009 the foreign minister announced that Australia would host the 2011 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth. The week-long event will culminate in a meeting of commonwealth leaders. Traditionally, CHOGM includes a royal visit, a meeting of commonwealth foreign ministers, a commonwealth business forum, a commonwealth youth forum, a commonwealth people’s forum, and a people’s space. Each of the above is a significant undertaking in its own right. Based on previous CHOGMs, an estimated 4 000 people will attend the Perth CHOGM. Around two-thirds of participants will be international visitors, many of them visiting Perth for the first time. The delegate numbers include upwards of 1 000 local and international media. The staging of such a major global event in our city presents an exciting opportunity to showcase Perth and Western Australia to the world, as well as extending our international trade and investment links and networks. The state will support the Australian government in staging the event through the provision of key services, including some aspects of event security, health and emergency services, and traffic management. In addition, the Western Australian government will support a number of initiatives that promote the state and help the Western Australian community and businesses to participate in CHOGM activities and opportunities. The government has recently appointed Mr Richard Muirhead to the role of state director of CHOGM. Mr Muirhead, supported by the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, will oversee state planning for the event. Ms M.M. Quirk: What is he being paid? The SPEAKER: Member! Mr C.J. BARNETT: I am pleased to also announce today that Mr Mark Barnaba, executive chairman of Azure Capital Limited, will lead Western Australia’s involvement in the commonwealth business forum. I am also pleased that Ms Sue Ash, the chief executive officer of Western Australian Council of Social Service, has agreed to coordinate the Western Australian non-government organisation contribution to the commonwealth people’s forum. Mr Muirhead, Mr Barnaba and Ms Ash will join a steering committee chaired by Mr Peter Conran, the Director General of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, to provide guidance and direction on Western Australia’s involvement in CHOGM 2011. Planning is well underway, and the pace will quicken as we move towards this

5036 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] important international meeting of countries, cultures, businesses, youth and communities in Western Australia. Today I invite all Western Australians to work with us as we move towards welcoming people from the 54 commonwealth nations, including the Prime Ministers and Presidents of those nations. VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES ROYAL COMMISSION — FINAL REPORT — WESTERN AUSTRALIAN RESPONSE Statement by Minister for Emergency Services MR R.F. JOHNSON (Hillarys — Minister for Emergency Services) [2.06 pm]: I take this opportunity to inform all members of the house about the details of the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission’s final report and what this means to Western Australia and our emergency services. The commission’s final report, which was released by the Victorian state government on Saturday, 31 July, contains 67 recommendations that centred around key areas, including the bushfire safety policy—stay or go versus “Prepare. Act. Survive”; emergency and incident management; fire ground response; electricity-caused fire; deliberately lit fires; land and fuel management; and organisational structure. Although a number of the recommendations focus on Victoria, WA’s emergency services will now assess the details to determine what, or whether, changes are required to further enhance operational effectiveness and community safety locally. Since the tragic loss of the life and property during the Victorian bushfires in February 2009, the Fire and Emergency Services Authority has been working closely with other agencies to review and assess the state’s prevention, preparedness and response capabilities. WA’s emergency services have already undertaken significant reforms and adopted national recommendations that have flowed from the commission’s interim report, which was released in August 2009. A key area is the significant changes FESA has introduced to community information and warning systems. Prior to the last bushfire season, WA agreed to adopt the new national bushfire community awareness campaign—“Prepare. Act. Survive”—which encourages homeowners to prepare their properties and leave early. As part of this campaign, FESA distributed more than 40 000 kits to people living in bushfire-prone areas. In relation to community warnings, I launched the new state alert, a purpose-built system that was developed by FESA and WA Police. Last season, the state alert was activated on nine occasions and sent out more than 20 000 messages to people in the community to keep them informed about an emergency situation. Our government fully commends and supports the decisive action that our emergency services have undertaken since the tragic Victorian bushfires to ensure that our state is well protected. As part of this reform process, our government introduced new laws prior to the previous bushfire season, which included providing FESA with the power to take control of major fires, clearly defining a single chain of command. Interestingly, this is a key recommendation in the commission’s final report. In addition, we increased the penalties for arson earlier this year. Our government is committed to protecting local communities from bushfires. Last season we listened to the warnings from the Bureau of Meteorology and FESA about a high-risk fire season and we joined forces with the federal government to boost the aerial fleet with a second type I helicopter. That decision played a key role in saving lives and property on a number of occasions, especially in Toodyay. In the recent state budget, we reported a $128 million boost to front-line emergency services over the next four years. Our government welcomes the commission’s final report and the valuable opportunity it presents for our emergency services to enhance community safety for all Western Australians. V8 SUPERCARS CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES — BARBAGALLO RACEWAY Statement by Minister for Sport and Recreation MR T.K. WALDRON (Wagin — Minister for Sport and Recreation) [2.09 pm]: On Saturday, 7 August, following months of complex negotiations, the Premier, the Minister for Tourism and I were pleased to announce that the Liberal–National government has committed more than $10.5 million to bring the V8 Supercars Championship Series back to Perth for the next five years. This funding announcement constitutes a $10.5 million investment in facilities upgrades at Barbagallo Raceway, as well as providing funding for V8SCA sanction fees. When V8 Supercars Australia withdrew the 2010 race round, there was no commitment to return the series to WA, and, importantly, a number of issues were identified with the existing infrastructure at Barbagallo Raceway. I know from experience how critical some of these concerns were. During the 2009 race round, I was able to see firsthand the conditions under which the teams were forced to operate in the pits, and the potential for something to go terribly wrong was a real concern for me. This government was determined to address these issues, certainly with a view to attracting the V8 supercar series back to Western Australia, but, as importantly, to ensuring that the motorsport enthusiasts across the state who utilised the track year round had access to a safe, modern and well-provisioned facility. The Department of Sport and Recreation has been working tirelessly with the Western Australian Sporting Car Club, V8 Supercars Australia and Eventscorp to achieve an outcome that will support a return of the WA round of the supercar

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5037 series. This investment in our premier motorsport facility will also benefit the broader motorsport community in Western Australia that utilises the track extensively throughout the year. On top of the $5 million previously committed by this government to the first stage of the redevelopment of Barbagallo Raceway, this commitment of $10.5 million will fund a new hard stand, back-of-house services, corporate and race control facilities, medical facilities and communications infrastructure to host a V8 event. This new partnership with V8SA not only brings the event back to Perth, but also allows Eventscorp to utilise its expertise in marketing to help promote the event locally, nationally and internationally, and significantly elevate the race weekend program. I would like to make a really important point that I do not want to get lost in the excitement of the V8s returning to WA. Part of the funding commitment by the government is an allocation to cover costs for future track design and for preparation to acquire Department of Environment and Conservation land adjacent to the raceway that will provide for future proposed track extensions. This demonstrates the government’s commitment to ensuring an adequate provision of infrastructure to the motorsport industry in WA for the future. On the weekend, it was really pleasing to see Rick Gill from the WA Sporting Car Club and V8 Supercars CEO, Martin Whittaker, sharing their enthusiasm for a return to WA of this competition. I know that this decision was greeted with enthusiasm by all the motorsport enthusiasts out there. It will ensure that Western Australia will be able to attract more events of national and international significance. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS — AMENDOLA REPORT 367. Mr E.S. RIPPER to the Premier: Given the fear in the community that WorkChoices will be resurrected by the Liberal Party — Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Do not laugh. There is real concern. Given the fear in the community that WorkChoices will be resurrected by the Liberal Party at both state and federal levels, I ask — (1) Why will the Premier not release the report of the $800 000 industrial relations review undertaken by Steven Amendola, a well-known right-wing industrial advocate, before the federal election? (2) Do Western Australians not deserve to see a report that they have paid for so handsomely? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Mr Speaker, it is nice to be back. I thank the Leader of the Opposition. (1)–(2) The only fear about WorkChoices is the fear in the Liberal campaign that people do not care about the issue; that is the only fear. If there is fear in this campaign in this state, it is about the mining tax—that is where the fear is—because that is about jobs and continuity of employment. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Thank you, members. Mr C.J. BARNETT: They are all back; it is great. The report on the industrial relations system is something that the state government has done and should have done. When the Howard government took responsibility for industrial relations under the corporations power, it left the Western Australian jurisdiction with basically a remnant. The state jurisdiction, therefore, covers state government employees—public servants—as is the case in every other state, plus we were the only state that did not hand over responsibility for non-incorporated private businesses; in other words, the small business sector. There has been change. Fair work legislation has come in federally, and we will probably incorporate aspects of that into changes in state law. Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: What we have is a long-existing state industrial relations system that no longer has the function or role that it used to. The report looks into that and looks into what we might do. Mr E.S. Ripper: Let’s have a look at it then! Mr C.J. BARNETT: I am sorry; it is a government report and the government will consider it. It is not about WorkChoices. Mr M. McGowan: It’s $830 000 worth of taxpayers’ money! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Sorry, sunshine!

5038 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr Speaker, we will look at that report. It has not been considered — Mr R.H. Cook: Not for seven months! Mr C.J. BARNETT: No, it has not, because it is not at the top of our agenda. It is not anywhere near the top of this state’s agenda. When that report is considered, we will decide which, if any, of the recommendations we will adopt—and it will be about modernising the Western Australian industrial relations system to make it consistent with the changes that have happened federally. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: When cabinet has considered that report, which will be probably some time this year, then we will release our response, which will be what we will do with the state’s industrial relations system, and at that stage we will release the report. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I stress that we do not have an agenda about establishing WorkChoices in Western Australia. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS — AMENDOLA REPORT 368. Mr E.S. RIPPER to the Premier: I have a supplementary question. Who was it in the Liberal Party who asked the government to withhold this report until after the federal election? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: No-one. MINERALS RESOURCE RENT TAX — MAGNETITE – IRON ORE INDUSTRY 369. Ms A.R. MITCHELL to the Premier: Last month I visited the Mid West region and heard firsthand from representatives of the mining sector about the disastrous impact the federal government’s proposed minerals resource rent tax will have on the industry, particularly the magnetite – iron ore industry. Could the Premier please outline how this tax grab will impact the burgeoning magnetite industry in this state and what the Premier has done to draw this matter to the attention of the federal government? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: That is a good question. I thank the member for Kingsley for the question. I also thank the member for Geraldton for arranging a visit through the Mid West by a group of Liberal new members of Parliament. That is what members of Parliament should be doing—travelling around the state and learning about some of the developments and some of the issues. So, well done to the group that went on that trip. It was far better than wandering off to exotic parts of the world. Mr P.B. Watson: Like Wimbledon! The SPEAKER: Members! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I think opposition members need more time out; they need a longer break. I would have thought they would come back with a bit of professionalism about them. Mr E.S. Ripper: Losing your place already! Mr C.J. BARNETT: No. Mr P.B. Watson interjected. The SPEAKER: Member for Albany, I formally call you for the first time! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Mr Speaker, a major issue in Western Australia is the federal Labor government’s proposed minerals resource rent tax. This tax is flawed in many ways, but in the most obvious way, it is a discriminatory tax in the sense that it applies to iron ore and coal, and will amend — Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I do not know which drone that was over there. Who was it that time? Mr P.B. Watson: It was me. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Okay; it was the member for Albany—that drone. Withdrawal of Remark Mr M. McGOWAN: Mr Speaker, the Premier deliberately used an unparliamentary term when referring to a member of this house and I ask him to withdraw.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5039

Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER: I formally call the member for Vasse for the first time and, likewise, call the member for Victoria Park for the first time! Mr F.M. Logan interjected. The SPEAKER: If you want to join in that, member for Cockburn, I would be happy to add your name to the list; but I am going to resist for the time being. Mr F.M. Logan: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: I would like to see question time proceed a little more orderly at this stage, and I am not going to accept a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr C.J. BARNETT: The minerals resource rent tax or, if members like, the petroleum version of it, has been applied to what the federal Labor government sees as the wealthy parts of the mining industry—basically offshore petroleum, high-grade coal from the eastern states and iron ore—thinking, obviously, about the Pilbara. But there are some minerals that require a higher level of processing and so it becomes absolutely fundamental at what point of the processing this tax applies. If we take just the iron ore industry, which is obviously important to this state—we produce over a third of the world’s international trade in iron ore—the federal government is thinking about the Pilbara iron ore. The grade of iron ore in the Pilbara—the hematite iron ore—is typically 62 per cent iron content, so it can, basically, be dug up, put on a train, sent to a port and exported. It involves minimal processing, and therefore it can be taxed as a high-value, direct-shipping product. However, iron ore is iron ore; iron is an element. There are two major types of iron ore: hematite 62 per cent; and magnetite. Magnetite iron ore, which has a different formula, has about 25 to 30 per cent iron content—FeO compared with Fe2O3, if members did high school chemistry—and it is not a direct-shipping product, so it must be processed. If members think about the simple equation, because the grade is so much lower, two to three times the volume has to be mined to get the same amount of iron, so even the mining operation is two to three times the size. It is then still low grade so it cannot just be put on a ship; it has to be ground down to very, very fine particles to allow for magnetic separation. Then it has to go through further processing—washing and the like—so that it is at a quality and grade to be a saleable product. To get it to a saleable product takes a high degree of processing— quite different from hematite iron ore. Magnetite iron ore is similar—as a mineral and the processing operation involved—to lateritic nickel. It is a highly intensive, energy-intensive, complex processing operation. It is quite different from that of the processing of iron ore in the Pilbara, and yet, under the federal Labor Party’s proposal it is all in. Magnetite iron ore projects are being included by Labor in this sort of super profits mentality; they are anything but that. It is a marginal, fledgling industry, yet the federal Labor Party, with the support of members opposite, is treating this as though it is some super profit product. We have two projects under construction in Western Australia, with up to 16 other magnetite projects at various stages of feasibility studies. This is a whole new industry for Western Australia, but Labor, with its stunning, stunning level of lack of understanding of this industry, has simply lumped it in with 62 per cent iron ore. What is incredible is that all members opposite support it, do they not? They all support the magnetite iron ore industry being under minerals. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Do all members opposite support it? Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: The mineral resource rent tax includes magnetite iron ore, and every one of the members opposite supports it. They are out there, in federal campaigns, supporting a mineral resource rent tax not only on the Pilbara but also on the fledgling industry of the Mid West. I urge members opposite to go and see the member for Geraldton and ask him to take them up there and show them a bit of the real Western Australia and learn something about the industry! Members opposite are hopeless! Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Okay, will the Leader of the Opposition tell me right now if he supports the mineral resource rent tax? Yes or no? Mr E.S. Ripper: Tony Abbott won’t fund the infrastructure! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Yes or no? Mr E.S. Ripper: You won’t fund the infrastructure! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Does the Leader of the Opposition support it? Mr E.S. Ripper: Of course I support it! Of course I support it!

5040 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr C.J. BARNETT: Do government members support it? Government members: No! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Do opposition members support it? Mr E.S. Ripper: Of course they support it! Mr C.J. BARNETT: We do not know—does the opposition support it? Do any opposition members not support it? Mr E.S. Ripper: Third time lucky—you might listen! Mr C.J. BARNETT: What a joke, Mr Speaker—what a joke! They have had a few months to think about this and they still do not know what their position is. They still cannot stand in this chamber and say, “We do not support the mineral resource rent tax and we do not support its application to magnetite.” I wrote to Prime Minister Julia Gillard to make the case, and I will table the letter if members like, because they should read it and learn something about magnetite and then go and ask the member for Geraldton if he will show them around his electorate and show them something of the industry. [See paper 2393.] GOVERNMENT FEES AND CHARGES — PREMIER’S COMMENTS 370. Mr B.S. WYATT to the Premier: I refer to this government’s rise in household fees and charges and to the Premier’s comments in which he dismissed, with laughter, the concerns of an aged pensioner about the cost of living. (1) Will the Premier apologise to those people in our community living on fixed incomes, especially pensioners and struggling families, for his callous comments? (2) Will the Premier guarantee that the increases projected for next year will not be more than consumer price index increases? (3) Will the Premier remove budget assumptions for a 22 per cent rise in the cost of electricity and an 8.4 per cent rise in the cost of water from his financial plan in the midyear review of December this year? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Mr Speaker, I made no callous comments to any pensioner. Mr B.S. Wyatt: I think everybody saw it on TV. It was a very arrogant approach. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Had I said anything that I might regret to a pensioner, the opposition would have quoted it. I do not know what — Mr B.S. Wyatt: Your laughter and arrogant approach was there for all to see, and you know it! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Will the member for Victoria Park please tell me what he is referring to? Mr B.S. Wyatt: Why don’t you show a bit of respect for the people you are hitting on a day-to-day basis with increased fees and charges? Mr C.J. BARNETT: I do not know what the member is referring to. Mr B.S. Wyatt: You are an arrogant man, Barnett. The SPEAKER: I will formally call you for the second time, member for Victoria Park. There is a question before this house. I am struggling to hear it, because members on both sides are yelling and interjecting. The member for Victoria Park has asked a question. I would like to hear the answer from the Premier. I am struggling to do so at the moment, Premier. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I do not know what the — Mr P. Papalia interjected. The SPEAKER: I call you formally for the first time, member for Warnbro. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I am not sure what the member for Victoria Park was referring to; he may even have been referring to the question, could you live on a pension? I do not know if that is what he was referring to. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Okay—why did he not say so? It would have — Mr B.S. Wyatt: It seems that you have worked it out all by yourself, you dimwit.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5041

Mr C.J. BARNETT: Despite the media trying to say it, I have never said that I could live as I do on a pension. Mr B.S. Wyatt: Right; now you have never said that. Okay. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I have not. I said that I would not die; I would survive. But I understand very clearly that people on pensions and people on — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: There is no point. The SPEAKER: Take a seat, Premier. I am sure that the member for Victoria Park wants an answer to the question. Many members in this chamber are preventing that answer from being heard. I formally call the member for Warnbro for the second time. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I certainly acknowledge, as I did to that particular caller on radio, that it is very tough for people who are dependent on the pension. I recognise that and, as I have said a number of times in this chamber, I recognise that the increases in electricity prices and water charges hurt. Of course they do; they have been significant increases. I am not going to go back to retrace history — Mr B.S. Wyatt: What about the midyear review then? You are not retracing history, so what about the midyear review? Mr C.J. BARNETT: Mr Speaker, the idea in the chamber is that a thinking member asks a question and then has some courtesy to wait for the answer. Mr B.S. Wyatt: We have been waiting for a while. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I think the member for Victoria Park has a few brains. Ms M.M. Quirk: Just say sorry. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Really, Mr Speaker. To live on a pension is tough and electricity price rises hurt. I understand that. Mr B.S. Wyatt: Clearly, you don’t! Mr C.J. BARNETT: We inherited nearly $1 billion in debt. We had to deal with it, and we did deal with it. We did not try to conceal the issue. It might surprise members opposite that the people of Western Australia, including pensioners who feel the burden, understand why it was done—why it was necessary. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Well, they do; they understand. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: We also allocated large amounts of money to the hardship utility grants scheme. We are also providing free public transport for seniors during daylight hours. We are doing a lot to help people on lower incomes. We are doing a lot to provide increased opportunities for all Western Australians. As to the budget forecast, I know members opposite are totally preoccupied with forward estimates; totally preoccupied. Mr B.S. Wyatt: No; this is actually this year’s budget. Are you going to change it for the midyear review? Mr C.J. BARNETT: If the member for Victoria Park thinks, he will know that he has answered his own question—this year’s budget. This year’s budget is the budget for the 2010–11 year. Next year—surprise, surprise—there will be a budget for the 2011–12 year. At that point, members will see exactly what will happen. GOVERNMENT FEES AND CHARGES — PREMIER’S COMMENTS 371. Mr B.S. WYATT to the Premier: I have a supplementary question: will the Premier release his department’s modelling on the impact on seniors of his fees and charges increase? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: No; I will not. I am not even aware of any modelling. If the member — Mr B.S. Wyatt: Yesterday, before an upper house committee, the Department for Communities said that you were doing modelling. Perhaps you had better speak to your ministers. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Perhaps the member for Victoria Park had better ask the relevant minister, because —

5042 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr B.S. Wyatt: No; the DPC is doing the modelling. You are the head of Premier and Cabinet. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Thank you, members. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Obviously, the Labor Party has got its instructions to come in here and try to raise cost of living issues—they all have their little scripts to run. Good luck to them! It is a federal election, so carry on. The people of Western Australia will judge this government on its economic and social performance at the time of the next election. I believe pensioners and seniors will support this government. Mr B.S. Wyatt: Are you going to release your modelling? No, you are not. Mr C.J. BARNETT: You didn’t ask the question. INDEPENDENT PUBLIC SCHOOLS — REFORM 372. Mr P.T. MILES to the Minister for Education: In the Wanneroo electorate there are five independent public schools. Will the minister please provide to the house an update on the progress of this government’s landmark independent public school reforms? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: I am delighted to answer the member for Wanneroo’s question, and commend him for his great interest in the area of empowering our public schools and giving more autonomy to principals and school councils. The independent public schools initiative is the centrepiece of our policy to empower school communities to make the best decisions they can for the children in those schools. This initiative is gathering momentum. In the first intake 106 expressions of interest were received and 134 in the second intake. There have been 240 expressions of interest over the two intakes with a total of 98 schools now participating in the independent public schools initiative. The response of schools has been far greater than I expected it to be. Among school leaders the notion of being able to lead their schools and to make decisions more quickly than the bureaucracy has been able to in the past has been very engaging for them. It has enthused many of our fine educators in the public school system. In the most recent intake of 64 schools, 16 of them are in regional areas and 48 in the metropolitan area. They stretch from Port Hedland in the north to Albany in the south. There are two schools in Kalgoorlie, one of which I visited last week, O’Connor Primary School. On the coast there are Dunsborough and Geographe primary schools. Schools of all different types spread across the state are participating. I am really pleased that quite a large number of education support centres have taken up this initiative, which I think will be very important, through their council and their leadership, for the communities around those ed support centres to be very close to the decisions made for those students. District high schools, senior high schools, primary schools and others have joined that group in this intake. One of the most exciting parts of the initiative has been the formation of clusters of schools. Several clusters have been formally established through this system, while at the same time many more informal groupings and networks of schools are working together. In the south metropolitan excellent schools in a cluster are working to provide the best possible range of subjects they possibly can for their students and to synchronise their timetables to give more choices, especially in the senior years in high schools. These schools are relishing the fact that this policy has not only cut bureaucracy but is also allowing them to choose their own staff, which is very important in tailoring staff to the schools’ needs. Most importantly and most interestingly has been the support across the political spectrum. I have received letters from members opposite, from members on this side of the house and from federal members around the state encouraging this initiative and supporting schools in their electorates. Support and interest has also come from interstate. Recently the South Australian Minister for Education visited Ashdale Secondary College with me, one of the independent public schools. As we walked out Hon Jay Weatherill said, “I think this initiative is going to answer all my problems in South Australia.” Of course, we know that our somewhat light-fingered Prime Minister has also taken this on as her initiative and has been singing its praises. All in all, Western Australia is leading the nation with its independent public schools initiative. The Premier was with me last Tuesday at the launch of the induction program for the latest intake and was highly impressed with those people. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Member for Pilbara and member for Victoria Park, you have opportunities in this place to make contributions in various ways. I prefer that you ask questions. Dr E. CONSTABLE: Just to finish, Western Australia is clearly leading the nation with its independent public schools initiative and the view that it is very important to empower local school communities to do the very best they can for students in their schools.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5043

WATER CHARGES — COST REFLECTIVITY 373. Mr F.M. LOGAN to the Minister for Water: The minister has told this house on a number of occasions that the price the community pays for water has to increase until it reaches cost reflectivity. (1) What is the final price of cost reflectivity per kilolitre to the ordinary Western Australian family household? (2) When will the final point of cost reflectivity be reached? (3) What guarantees will the minister give to battling Western Australian families that water price increases will be no more than the consumer price index once cost reflectivity is reached? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for his question. (1)–(3) The government is very considerate of the cost of living to people in Western Australia. Mr E.S. Ripper: Electricity up 45 per cent and water up 30 per cent. That is not much consideration. Dr G.G. JACOBS: Having said that, in the area of water, which it, and not electricity, is what the question was about, there is a recognition that we need to move the cost of providing and delivering water, which is a finite resource, as I often say in this house, to people in Western Australia. If we do not do that and we do not move that—I am not saying that we move all that way—I believe that the chickens will come home to roost eventually, because we know that there is in fact a real cost of providing that service and that product to people in Western Australia. The Premier and I have said on many occasions that we do not expect an increase next year of the quantum of that of this year. We are managing a very precious finite resource. The average rainfall for the years to date has been around 500 millimetres. We have received this year around about 300 millimetres. There is also a need — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Member for Mandurah, my advice previously to members on your side was that perhaps questions would be a better way of making a point. I am going to formally call you for the first time today. Dr G.G. JACOBS: We do need to manage this resource responsibly. We do need to recognise the impact it has on consumers. We do recognise that we have a precious and finite commodity. We are a government that will responsibly manage this. Prices and quantum into the future will be part of the budgetary process. We in the government know that we will be responsible in the management of this resource. The opposition will be informed of those increases. WATER CHARGES — COST REFLECTIVITY 374. Mr F.M. LOGAN to the Minister for Water: As a supplementary question, the minister has said that the price of water has to get to cost reflectivity. What would it be per kilolitre? He is the Minister for Water. He should answer it. Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: The member for Cockburn can do his own homework! I have said in this house that we have not yet achieved full cost reflectivity in the price of water; however, we are moving in that direction. Next year, the quantum of increase will not be the same as in this year. MIDLAND HEALTH CAMPUS — CONSTRUCTION 375. Mr F.A. ALBAN to the Minister for Health: I was concerned to see television advertisements relating to the new Midland health campus and the future of the staff currently with Swan District Hospital. I note that the advertisements also suggested that there were delays in the construction of the campus. I ask the minister to advise the house about the authenticity of these claims. Dr K.D. HAMES replied: That is an excellent question from the local member. I was a bit surprised when I watched that ad on television the other day, and since then I have got copies of the advertisement that the federal member for Hasluck put out on the hospital. In fact, one reminds me of the former state Minister for Health, because there is a sign up there saying “New Midland health campus being constructed 2012.” As we know, the former minister was extremely good at putting up signs about hospitals being constructed. I remember that the Fiona Stanley Hospital sign was there for a long time with not a shovel of dirt being turned. Here is the picture — Mrs M.H. Roberts: Guess what? The sign is still there! It was there last week.

5044 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Dr K.D. HAMES: Yes, but what is behind it? The member for Midland can see construction—there are buildings going up! I advise the member for Midland that today the government released information about the second stage of construction, and $1.63 billion has been allocated to complete the second stage. This government is getting on and doing it, on time and on budget. I then received a letter, which has gone to all the residents in the Hasluck electorate. The member for Hasluck is obviously desperate to retain that seat. She is so desperate, in fact, that she peddles total mistruths about the hospital to the people of her electorate. Let us go through what she has put in her advertisement. First, the hospital will be constructed in 2016. That is wrong! I have stated over and again that it is due for completion in 2015. Second, the Liberals do not care about people’s health needs and they will not guarantee the jobs of health workers at Swan District Hospital. I have said publicly, at least twice, that the government will guarantee the jobs of the staff at that hospital and that those people would either go to the new hospital and work at the new hospital or, if they wanted to stay in the public sector, be retained in that job. I have said that publicly on at least two occasions. So, that is another lie—lie number two! Third, the hospital was going to be completed in 2013. That was not a lie; in fact, it was going to be completed in 2012. What did we find out about Midland hospital when we came into office? Absolutely nothing had been done! Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. The SPEAKER: Member for Midland! Dr K.D. HAMES: And when we go — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Member for Midland, I formally call you for the first time, along with the member for Girrawheen. Dr K.D. HAMES: Let us go back to what happened in the budget in the lead-up to our forming government in 2008. We found that there had been two deferrals of the Midland hospital. After the former government made these promises in its early days, in 2000, construction was deferred by six months in the 2007–08 budget and then deferred — Mrs M.H. Roberts: The federal government provided $160 million. Dr K.D. HAMES: Mr Speaker, it is very difficult when there is this constant nattering from my right. Several members interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES: The construction of the Midland hospital was deferred by a further six months in the 2008– 09 budget. How much had the former government allocated in its budget to the construction of the hospital? It had allocated about half the cost of the hospital. The former government said it was going to be built in 2012, but it had not allocated the money required to build the thing! When we got into government in late 2008, we found that there was not enough money and no plans; there was not a single design drawing related to the construction of that hospital. There was absolutely nothing! There was no way on this earth that the former government would have been able to complete the hospital at any time. Mrs M.H. Roberts: You were the one who was going to complete the hospital. You have $160 million of federal money and you are still two years behind time. You are an embarrassment! The SPEAKER: I direct the minister and the member for Midland in this case. Minister, stick with the questions that you have been asked. Member for Midland, if you want to avoid being called formally again, I suggest to you, respectfully, that you might listen to some of the answer; you might then want to ask some questions instead of consistently interjecting. Dr K.D. HAMES: Excellent idea. There was not enough money to build the hospital, no designs were done and no plans were done. This government went to the federal government seeking assistance and it put up half of the money, which allowed us to get on with the job of building the hospital. That is what we are doing; we are getting up, we will build the hospital, and we will have it done by 2015. To the member who puts out loads of rubbish like these press releases I am holding—mistruths, mistruths and more mistruths! GENERAL PRACTITIONER SUPER CLINICS — FEDERAL LIBERAL PARTY ELECTION COMMITMENT 376. Mr R.H. COOK to the Minister for Health: Before I ask my question, I acknowledge the students from Tranby College in the gallery today. I refer to Tony Abbott’s statement that, if elected, a future Liberal federal government will cut funding to general practitioner super clinics.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5045

(1) If that happens, will the Barnett government provide for any necessary shortfall in funding to complete the construction of the three metropolitan GP super clinics in Cockburn, Midland and Wanneroo that are currently underway thanks to $17 million of federal Labor funding? (2) Will the Barnett government commit to funding the three additional health clinics announced for Northam, the Pilbara and Rockingham to ensure that Western Australians do not miss out on these valuable services? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (1)–(2) Members opposite are obviously planning to run a federal election campaign in this Parliament; we would think that they would concentrate more on things that related to our state government responsibilities! It is quite clear that there are only three super clinics — Several members interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES: In fact, there are only two super clinics that this state government has agreed to be a part of— namely, the Midland clinic and the Wanneroo clinic. We have committed our funding and my understanding is that that funding will not be withdrawn for those two particular super clinics. I do not know about the Cockburn clinic, because that was done on a fly-by-nighter—come in, land, announce the clinic and disappear—with no involvement of the state government whatsoever. However, we are involved with the other two clinics and I have been working with the federal health minister trying to ensure that we have those up and running. Mr R.H. Cook: So you’d pay the full whack? Dr K.D. HAMES: I do not think that the funding for those clinics will be removed by the commonwealth government. Mr R.H. Cook: And the three additional clinics? Dr K.D. HAMES: The new ones that have been announced, again, by the fly-in ministers of the commonwealth government who flash over here for a few hours — Mr R.H. Cook: And invest in WA! Dr K.D. HAMES: It is a pity that they did not invest a bit more. They come over here and give us a little chunk of our money back; we would like a decent share of it back, not the piddling little amount that they are offering us! The alternative proposal that has been put forward by the federal Leader of the Opposition is in fact a very good one that reinstates the funding for after-hours general practitioner work by GPs. This current government has been reducing the funding of doctors who work after hours—reducing the funds. Would members opposite, who are driven by the unions, accept any of their workers working after hours and not getting additional pay for it? I bet that members opposite would not, yet that is what their colleagues in the commonwealth have been doing; they have been reducing funds for doctors who are working after hours. A Liberal government will put those funds back and will put funds into existing GP clinics to expand. I went to Wanneroo last week and talked to the GP clinics there. There is no reason that funding, instead of being in competition with the local GPs, could not be supportive of the local GPs. My reading of the health commitment by the Liberal Party is that the money will still be there, it will still be coming to Western Australia, and it will be going to general practitioner clinics to help GP clinics do what they do. GENERAL PRACTITIONER SUPER CLINICS — FEDERAL LIBERAL PARTY ELECTION COMMITMENT 377. Mr R.H. COOK to the Minister for Health: I have a supplementary question. The minister’s emergency departments are already failing to cope with demand. If the minister does not fund those general practitioner clinics as he is now suggesting, how will they cope? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: I have just very clearly made the point that the funding package from the commonwealth government to GPs and GP practices in Western Australia, which will keep patients from coming to our emergency departments, is a far better product under the Liberal Party’s policy than under the policy of the current Labor government. BURSWOOD TRAIN STATION Petition MR B.S. WYATT (Victoria Park) [2.50 pm]: I have a petition with 1 056 signatures, and I certify that it complies with the standing orders of the Legislative Assembly. The petition reads —

5046 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned, call upon the Barnett Government to take immediate and urgent steps to address the issue of community safety at the Burswood train station and its surrounding walkways. The State Government must fix the problems relating to violent and offensive behaviour, both at the platform of the Burswood train station, but also its immediate surrounds, including walkways on both sides of the station. We call upon the Government to install additional security lighting in the area, landscape of the area to improve its appearance and amenity and install CCTV cameras in the area. [See petition 309.] PAPERS TABLED Papers were tabled and ordered to lie upon the table of the house. TELECOMMUNICATIONS (INTERCEPTION) WESTERN AUSTRALIA AMENDMENT BILL 2010 Notice of Motion to Introduce Notice of motion given by Mr R.F. Johnson (Minister for Police). TOURISM INDUSTRY Notice of Motion Mr J.N. Hyde gave notice that at the next sitting of the house he would move — That this house expresses its grave concern at the continued decline of the Western Australian tourism industry and condemns the Minister for Tourism for her lack of interest and demonstrated failures in this portfolio. PILBARA WATER SUPPLY Notice of Motion Mr F.M. Logan gave notice that at the next day of sitting he would move — That this house condemn the Minister for Water for the failure to provide an adequate water supply for Pilbara communities. MEMBER FOR MORLEY — LEAVE OF ABSENCE Notice of Motion Mr J.E. McGrath gave notice that at the next day of sitting he would move — That leave be given for the absence from the Legislative Assembly of the member for Morley until 31 October 2010 on the ground of ill health. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AMENDMENT BILL 2010 Notice of Motion to Introduce Notice of motion given by Mr V.A. Catania. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE — FORMER MEMBER FOR ARMADALE Private Members’ Business, Questions on Notice — Statement by Speaker THE SPEAKER (Mr G.A. Woodhams): Members, in relation to the two notices of motion that stood in the name of the former member for Armadale, I advise that these have been removed from the notice paper. In relation to the former member’s private members’ business orders of the day 2, 11 and 15, “Renewable Energy in Western Australia”, “South West Infrastructure”, and “Port Infrastructure — Public Funding”, debate had been adjourned following the motions being moved. As orders of the day, they are in the possession of the house, and the name of the former member will remain on the notice paper as the member who moved them. Should those orders of the day come on for debate, I would be prepared to accept advice from the opposition at that time as to who has carriage of the order of the day and allow that member to reply. Two questions on notice from the former member for Armadale that were unanswered as at the last sitting day have been answered, and those answers will appear in Hansard.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5047

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND JUSTICE STANDING COMMITTEE Social Housing Inquiry — Terms of Reference — Statement by Speaker THE SPEAKER (Mr G.A. Woodhams): I advise members that I have received a letter dated 28 July 2010 from the member for Ocean Reef, the Deputy Chairman of the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee. The letter reads as follows — Dear Mr Speaker I wish to advise that the Community Development and Justice Committee has resolved to conduct an Inquiry with the following terms of reference: The Community Development and Justice Committee will examine the issue of social housing and report by 7 April 2011 on: (1) The role of government, and the private and the not-for-profit sector in facilitating affordable housing; (2) The effectiveness and appropriateness of social housing allocations in the metropolitan area and regional Western Australia; (3) The impact of public housing needs on specific groups; (4) The key factors influencing the supply of ‘sub-market’ affordable housing in Western Australia; (5) The integration of social housing asset management strategies into the larger urban and regional development process; (6) Financing affordable and sustainable social housing; (7) Alternative models for the provision of social housing; (8) Factors facilitating the movement of people from the social housing sector to the private market and home ownership; and (9) Particular housing initiatives needed for regions of rapid growth. I advise members that I have arranged for the committee’s terms of reference to be placed on the notice board of the Legislative Assembly for members’ information.

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS — AMENDOLA REPORT Matter of Public Interest THE SPEAKER (Mr G.A. Woodhams): I have received today a letter from the Leader of the Opposition in the following terms — I wish to raise the following as a matter of public interest today. “This House opposes WorkChoices industrial relations practices and calls on the Liberals to immediately release the $800,000 report by Steven Amendola into Western Australia’s industrial relations laws.” If sufficient members agree to this motion, I will allow it. [At least five members rose in their places.] MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont — Leader of the Opposition) [3.03 pm]: I move that — “This House opposes WorkChoices industrial relations practices and calls on the Liberals to immediately release the $800,000 report by Steven Amendola into Western Australia’s industrial relations laws.” One thing is clear: deep in their hearts, Liberals believe in WorkChoices. That is what Tony Abbott believes. That is what the Premier believes. Across the country, Liberals everywhere are burning with resentment that they cannot talk about this issue because it is not politically acceptable. This is a love that dare not speak its name. That is the position with Liberals and WorkChoices. It is a special love. Among those burning with frustration, among those true believers in the Liberal Party, are members of this government. Some of the most prominent of those burning with resentment are in fact members of this government. Let us look at the Premier himself. The Premier said in this place on Wednesday, 24 October 2007 — … I agree with the broad philosophy of the WorkChoices system, …

5048 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

That is what the Premier said less than three years ago. This is what the Premier said on Thursday, 28 February 2008 — I supported the concept of WorkChoices, … Why would not the Premier support the concept of WorkChoices? The Premier was a senior minister in the Court government. The Court government pioneered the whole concept of WorkChoices-style legislation in Western Australia. The Court government turned Western Australia into an industrial relations laboratory in which it conducted right-wing industrial relations experiments. That is exactly what the Court government did. The Court government spearheaded the industrial relations approach of the right wingers in the Liberal Party, and those very same people, when at last they got a Senate majority, took it forward with WorkChoices. However, they have now come to realise that that was a terrible political mistake. So, they have to lay quiet. They have to lay doggo. They have to refrain from talking about it. They have to say that WorkChoices is dead. However, when they get the chance, and when they have the political strength, they will bring back WorkChoices. This government has a majority in both houses of Parliament. What has been holding this government back? Is it a change of heart? No. It is not a change of heart. It is the federal election. This government does not want to show the people of Western Australia, or the people of Australia, what a Liberal government will really do with industrial relations. This government wants to bring back WorkChoices, but it does not want to talk about it. Let us look at exactly what is at stake. The Australian Centre for Industrial Relations Research and Training looked at the effects of the Court government’s individual workplace agreements. It found that 74 per cent of agreements provided no weekend penalty rates; 67 per cent of agreements provided no overtime rates of pay; 56 per cent of agreements provided an ordinary rate of pay below the award rate; 49 per cent of full-time, part- time and fixed-term agreements absorbed annual leave into the ordinary hourly rate of pay; and 75 per cent of agreements did not have a pay increase provision. Those are the broad statistics that demonstrate the type of exploitation that was unleashed by the Court government’s industrial relations agenda. We should never forget that the Premier was a senior minister in that government and that he personally supported these types of arrangements. These types of arrangements have a definite ill-effect on individual workers. I turn now to how these types of arrangements can affect an individual Western Australian worker. Let us look at the case of Richard Dow, a carer and disability worker with Activ. He was put onto an individual agreement when he was appointed an acting team leader for six weeks. He did not look at the whole agreement—he was just told by his manager to sign it—so he did not realise that he would be losing some penalty rates despite doing higher duties. He was paid a higher hourly rate, but he was not paid the penalties for working a Saturday or a Sunday. He said, “You think you can trust your employer to do right by you, but you can’t. Now I know I can’t trust a workplace agreement.” I refer to another case—the case of Terry Milligan, a school cleaner at Melville Senior High School. He worked for cleaning contract firm Airlite Group and was on an Australian workplace agreement for five years. He said that he did not realise what he was signing and that he was told that if he did not sign, he would not have a job. That is exactly what we in this place said would happen with this industrial relations system. He was told that if he did not sign, he would not have a job. He said that the contract meant that he had no freedom to argue his case for better conditions and pay. He said that he had no pay rise for five years and that his take-home pay was only $20 more than the dole. When he had the chance, he transferred back under government cleaning and a collective agreement. The conditions were better and at last he got access to pay rises. We can talk about this at a broad ideological and philosophical level. We can talk about this in broad terms, but we must all realise that this translates into individual pain for individual workers. That is why people voted resoundingly against it in 2007. That is why we have moved this motion today—to give members opposite a chance to say that they will vote against WorkChoices. That is the choice before them. They can vote against WorkChoices or they can seek to amend or oppose the motion. However, if they do that, they will be refusing the opportunity to vote against WorkChoices. A lot is at stake here. We on the Labor side are absolutely crystal clear on the question of WorkChoices, but that is not so for the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party spent $800 000 on a right-wing industrial relations henchman to write a review of Western Australian industrial law. Mr Steven Amendola has form. He is a right-wing industrial relations warrior. Western Australians have paid $800 000 for this report. Why can they not see the report? It is absolutely ridiculous for the government to say that it is still considering it and has not made a decision. It has had the report for more than seven months; it has had the report since before Christmas. There is only one reason not to release this report. That reason is political. The reason is to protect Tony Abbott. The reason is to stop Western Australians knowing what the Liberal government’s industrial relations agenda is. This government does not want Western Australia or Australia to see what a Liberal government is really prepared to do with industrial relations. If the Premier’s government is innocent of these charges and if we are wrong — Several members interjected.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5049

Mr E.S. RIPPER: If we are wrong, the Premier has one simple answer: release the report. If the report does not show a right-wing industrial relations agenda, the Premier has a simple answer: release the report, and release it before the federal election. MR F.M. LOGAN (Cockburn) [3.13 pm]: WorkChoices is back. It is in the report. The Minister for Commerce knows it; the Premier knows it. They know that it is in the report. They are sitting on the report. Eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars of taxpayers’ money has gone into that report and they are sitting on it. Why? They are sitting on the report because they know that WorkChoices is in it. How did we get to a $350 000 blow-out on this report? The estimated cost was $500 000. How did it get to $850 000? The disgraced former Minister for Commerce, the member for Vasse, who is a very talented man according to his supporters, failed to reach any formal agreement with Steven Amendola about how much the review would cost in the first place. When the member for Vasse negotiated with this sharp lawyer from Melbourne, he thought he was still running a bed and breakfast in Busselton and talking to a plumber from Dunsborough. He said, “So, Steven, how much do you think it’ll cost me to get rid of the unions and introduce individual work contracts in WA? What do you reckon, Steven? I reckon it’s a big job. I reckon half a brick will do it. Half a million; she’ll be right.” That was the former Treasurer. The former Treasurer of this state got nothing in writing and negotiated as though he were talking to a plumber from Dunsborough. What a joke! The Premier should not bring him back. If the Premier wants to lose any more money, he should bring him back, but just do not bring him back. What a joke! The cost of the review blew out to $850 000. It was so embarrassing to the disgraced former Treasurer and the Liberal government that the State Solicitor, Tim Sharp, had to write to Steven Amendola and beg for a reduction in the cost. Can members guess what Amendola said? He said, “No. Pay up $850 000.” This was the genius from Vasse. What do we now have? We have a report that the government has sat on since December 2009. Why is the report so secret? The report is secret because, as we know, in its 180-plus recommendations is a rehash of the Howard WorkChoices and the Kierath third wave legislation. Why do we know that? The member for Vasse asked for those issues to be included in the terms of reference. The terms of reference were structured in such a way as to encourage Amendola to put in the recommendations the reintroduction of individual work contracts. It is obvious; we know that. So why should the government sit on the report? The government is sitting on the report because it knows that it is embarrassing at this point in the political cycle. What do we expect from the review? We expect individual work contracts. What will we get as a result of that? We will get reduced pay and conditions, as we heard in the examples given by the Leader of the Opposition. We will get reduced access to unfair dismissal laws. We know that that is what is coming. We will get an attack on annual leave, sick leave, allowances and penalty rates. We know that that is what we will get because that was in Kierath’s third wave and in Howard’s workplace relations. That is what is coming back to Western Australia once the report is released. Why did the government get Steven Amendola to write this report? As the Leader of the Opposition said, Steven Amendola has form. He was the legal representative for both Reith and Tony Abbott in the Howard era. He was heavily involved in the Maritime Union of Australia dispute on the waterfront, a disgraceful period in Australian history whereby a government conspired to de-unionise the waterfront across the whole of Australia. He was heavily involved in the G. and K. O’Connor abattoir dispute, a violent lockout that went on for nine months. He was the legal advocate for the company. He is a contributor to the publications of the right-wing Institute of Public Affairs. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN: The member for Vasse would know; he would be in there with them. The right-wing member for Vasse is just itching to get back to try to attack the unions. He is a right-wing thug from Busselton. What is Amendola’s view on the Fair Work Act? He is reported as saying — “Unions are going to be dealt back into enterprise bargaining,” … “They will be able to go into workplaces; they will be able to look at non-members’ terms and conditions; they’ll be able to use it as a membership drive; and any disputes that arise in respect of any particular individual they will take to the courts and they can make an application for injunctive relief.” That is his current view of the Fair Work Act. What can we expect from the Steven Amendola report? We expect it to recommend the reintroduction of WorkChoices. Will the minister release this report so that the public of Western Australia can see what it actually says? MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe — Premier) [3.20 pm]: Let me go through some of the recent history of this matter. The recent history of commonwealth versus state responsibility for industrial relations began in June 2005 when the then Howard government sought the referral of industrial relations powers from the states to the commonwealth. There was some discussion about that at the time, and the states declined to do so. As a result, the Howard government made use of the corporations power to introduce a national workplace relations system. I happen to think that that is not what the corporations power was intended for, but that is what happened. All the states have retained control over their own public service, which is sensible. It would be untenable if another

5050 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] level of government determined industrial relations conditions and salaries for state government employees. The second aspect is that because the corporations power relates obviously to incorporated bodies, unincorporated businesses such as small businesses did not automatically go to the commonwealth system. The other states, which are Labor states, referred those powers to the federal government, but Western Australia declined to do so. All the states have retained industrial relations power with respect to state public servants. Western Australia, in addition, has retained jurisdiction over unincorporated businesses. That leaves us with a remnant of the workplace relations system. It is estimated that for industrial relations in Western Australia, about 65 per cent of people are covered by the federal jurisdiction and probably about 20 per cent are covered under the Western Australian system. Ms J.M. Freeman: Was that 35 per cent? Mr C.J. BARNETT: No; about 20 per cent. This is from a survey. It is not clear where those 20 per cent are covered, or even whether they are covered. About 65 per cent of employees fall under the federal jurisdiction and at least 20 per cent fall under the state jurisdictions. The commissioning of this report was a sensible thing to do. In January 2009, the then Minister for Commerce, the member for Vasse, made a public statement that Western Australia would not refer industrial relations powers—for example, unincorporated businesses—to the federal government, and that the state would proceed instead with a review of the current Western Australian workplace laws and an overhaul of the large bureaucracy that administers them. There is a requirement to change the administration and the law because much of the Western Australian law is now redundant. In June 2009, a Mr Steven Amendola was — Mr E.S. Ripper: “The” Mr Amendola, not “a” Mr Amendola. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I do not see the point of that interjection. Mr Amendola was appointed to head the review. He has had a long period of consultation. He has acted as an advocate for the federal government at various times. In November 2009, the then minister received the review. That is the process and that is what happened. Industrial relations is a traditional point of difference between Liberal-led and Labor governments. As the member for Scarborough just said to me, one of the issues has been the continual changes—three major changes—to industrial relations. I think that both employers and employees are worn out by that. Probably the one thing they will agree on is that they do not want more radical change. The state government is not contemplating that. Indeed, we are contemplating bringing some of the aspects of the current federal laws to apply at the state level. We are trying to get consistency between them. We are looking at what remaining responsibilities will lie with the Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission. Clearly, it has a far lesser role than it once had and we are looking at reforming and changing the legislation. We are doing that not so much in a policy sense, but in a tidying-up sense. Cabinet is yet to consider this report in detail, but it will. When the minister has assessed it, and I and others have had a good look at the report and its recommendations, we will take that formally to cabinet. We will then go through it and decide which recommendations, if any, we will adopt and introduce. There is no radical industrial relations agenda here at all; that is not what this report is about. No doubt some recommendations will be accepted and some will not. We are simply tidying up the Western Australian industrial relations system. We will bring in some provisions of the Fair Work Act, which has been in place federally since 2008, and we will have a consistent regime. Mr E.S. Ripper: Do you deny that you are a true believer in WorkChoices? Mr C.J. BARNETT: I will comment on that in a second. We will tidy up the state system. Its legislative responsibility will be downsized because it is largely redundant, as will the number of people that operate it. We will modernise it, but we intend to retain jurisdiction over public servants and the unincorporated small business sector. There are some issues that concern this government and small business, including the right of entry of union officials into small businesses and the unfair dismissal laws. However, there will not be radical changes. We hope to provide a fairer deal for small business. Small businesses do not normally deal with unions and they do not want or need union officials coming into their business in a heavy-handed way. Anyone who has followed anything to do with industrial relations knows that industrial relations still has elements of “the club”, no matter what legislative arrangement is in place. Elements of “the club” tend to be arrangements and deals and a structure around big unions and big businesses. That is the reality of the industrial relations system under Liberal and Labor governments. We do not want to sit back and see the arrangements that suit big business in Sydney and Melbourne being applied to small businesses throughout Western Australia. We want to keep some flexibility in the system and we want to protect some of the rights of the smaller businesses in this state to operate without the fear of union intimidation. That is not radical; that is just being sensible and fair. We will

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5051 introduce aspects of the new federal legislation to give it consistency. We simply want to keep some flexibility and some protection for small business from any form of intimidation by heavy-handed union officials. I do not think union officials should simply be able to walk into a business at will and be intimidatory. If we have restrictive conditions relating to so-called unfair dismissal, it is difficult to get businesses to employ people. If members look at this state — Ms J.M. Freeman interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: The member is just proving it. As a former union official, she is just waiting to be able to take union officials into small businesses and family-owned businesses with just one or two employees. As she snarls across the chamber to me, she demonstrates exactly what small business is fearful of. Intimidation is what the member is about. Mr E.S. Ripper: Are you intimidated by the member for Nollamara? Mr C.J. BARNETT: I am intimidated by the member for Nollamara because if I were running a small business such as a fish and chip shop or whatever, I would not want to see union officials barging into my business and telling me what I can and cannot do and demanding to look at my books and telling me what the rules will be. The snarling from the member opposite just reinforces in my mind who she really represents in here. She represents the union that she used to work for. She is still a union representative. In fact, most members opposite are union reps, as far as I can see; that is what they are. We are talking about no more than 20 per cent of the workforce. We are looking at modernising and getting rid of redundant provisions in the existing legislation, which is probably most of the act. We are looking also at conforming, complying and being consistent with much of the Fair Work Act, but we have retained jurisdiction over small business. We will be consistent with the federal law, but we want to make sure that small businesses in this state cannot be intimidated and that they have some flexibility. Collectively, small business is the biggest employer in this state, and we want to encourage small business to take on people, trainees and apprentices to maintain people in their employment. We do not want to see them placed under any undue pressure. So, yes, there is a philosophical difference between members on this side of the house and members on the opposite side of the house. I know that members opposite will run outside now and say that the WorkChoices system is coming back and all the rest of it. Move on! That was the 1990s. It is now 2010. Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: The Leader of the Opposition even read out a speech he made years ago. He has been going back through yellow pages with curled-up corners and been digging up old speeches from 10 years ago. Mr E.S. Ripper: What; from when you were in opposition in 2008? Two years ago? Mr C.J. BARNETT: It is 2010. Mr F.M. Logan: We heard one from Mike Nahan of three years ago! Mr C.J. BARNETT: We do agree with some flexibility in the workplace. Members on this side actually agree that both employers and employees have some intellect and some ability to make decisions for themselves. The thing members opposite hate most is individually minded employees who can think for themselves. Members opposite find it abhorrent that they can think for themselves and make some of their own decisions. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Yes, there is a difference. We actually respect employees and we actually think they can make some of their own decisions. We actually like them and trust them. Members opposite want to regulate them and have them under a union. This matter is not at the top of the agenda of the government. The report has been done. It has something like 193 recommendations; it is a large and complex report. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: The government is going through it carefully and diligently. Mr P. Papalia: You were right across it on the twenty-third! Mr C.J. BARNETT: What is the point? There is no point, Mr Acting Speaker. The ACTING SPEAKER: That will do, members! Mr C.J. BARNETT: It is a large and complex report with 193 recommendations. The government, through its agencies, is working progressively through that report. When we have formed a conclusion about which recommendations we may adopt and how we will deal with the state system of industrial relations law, we will take those recommendations to a cabinet meeting. We will then make a decision and we will bring those recommendations, which will involve legislative change, into this Parliament. And when we do that, we will release the report.

5052 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

MR W.R. MARMION (Nedlands — Minister for Commerce) [3.31 pm]: This is just a beat-up. It is just political desperation by opposition members. They are living in the past. We listened to the Leader of the Opposition talk about things that happened years and years ago. Mr M.J. Cowper: Jethro Tull! Mr W.R. MARMION: Yes, Jethro Tull—Ian Anderson; I think it is his birthday today. Mr F.M. Logan: It’s a bit of a worry that you know that! Mr W.R. MARMION: The only reason I know is that I heard it on the radio this morning; otherwise I would not have known that. At no stage has the government said it would reintroduce WorkChoices. As the Premier said, I have the report — Mr E.S. Ripper: Release it! Mr W.R. MARMION: How many times does a government release a report before it is taken to cabinet? What a joke! Come on! Several members interjected. Mr W.R. MARMION: The Amendola report has 400 pages and 193 recommendations. I was lucky as a new member to have a report that actually tells me all about issues with the industrial relations system. I was very lucky as a new member to have a report like that. Ms J.M. Freeman: You are the minister for industrial relations and you knew nothing about it before then, so you had to rely on a 400-page report! That’s the only way you got to know about industrial relations! Mr W.R. MARMION: It did help. Several members interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER: That will do, members! Mr W.R. MARMION: As a small business person for six years, I must say that I did not have very much contact with the union movement. However, I was lucky. Ms J.M. Freeman interjected. Mr W.R. MARMION: The government will release the report after I have considered the recommendations. As the Premier said, there is a lot to look at. I will look at and consider all the recommendations. There are some recommendations that need a little more consultation. Ms R. Saffioti: What have you been doing? Mr W.R. MARMION: I am sorry? Ms R. Saffioti: Seriously, what have you been doing? Mr W.R. MARMION: There are some recommendations that are not clear. I have been consulting with people, and even the people in the organisations I have consulted with have two conflicting views. I have to reach agreement on those views. There is no cover-up. Opposition members are trying to recycle WorkChoices for their own purposes. Several members interjected. Mr W.R. MARMION: Opposition members have talked about the terms of reference for the review of the industrial relations system, which was quite appropriate for the government to bring in. The terms of reference for the consultant, Amendola, are very clear. Under “Background” it reads — Between 15%–30% of employees in Western Australia remain in the state industrial relations system following Commonwealth policy to regulate industrial relations for employers who are constitutional corporations and their employees. It is estimated that most private sector employees in the State system are employed by small business. It is desirable a State system meets the needs of these particular employers and employees. Of course! The background continues — The Western Australian Government has committed to an independent review of the State industrial relations system. That is quite appropriate. The background continues — The primary purpose of the review is to ensure that the State industrial relations system: (a) provides flexibility and productivity; and —

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5053

As it should — (b) is competitive with elements of the new federal industrial relations system. That is very important. That is the background to the specific terms of reference. Members might take note of the very first term under “Terms of reference”, which reads — 1. The review of the State industrial relations system should take into account the Federal Government’s Fair Work Act 2009 and identify: (a) which elements of the Fair Work Act 2009 should form part of a reformed State industrial relations system; and (b) potential areas for harmonisation of State and federal industrial relations legislation. The terms of reference go into other aspects, but that was the first term. They continue — 2. The review of the State industrial relations system should specifically identify areas of legislative reform including but not limited to: a) unfair dismissal, to reduce the regulatory burden on business (especially small business), to discourage vexatious and frivolous claims and to streamline the process for resolving claims; Mr F.M. Logan: Minister, did the report answer all these questions? Mr W.R. MARMION: The member for Cockburn will find out when I release the report after it has been reviewed by cabinet. They continue — b) employment agreements, to ensure they meet the genuine needs of employers and employees, whether individually or collectively, provide sufficient flexibility, and are administratively simple; c) State awards, to ensure State awards meet the genuine needs of industry, provide individual employers and employees with sufficient flexibility and are simple to understand; d) union right of entry, to ensure that right of entry provisions appropriately balance the interests of the industrial parties including the basis of entry and its exercise; That is very important. We have to have balance there. They continue — e) minimum wages, to streamline the process for setting and adjusting minimum rates of pay; f) dispute resolution to enable effective and efficient prevention and resolution of industrial and employment disputes, including by mediation under the Employment Dispute Resolution Act 2008; g) statutory minimum conditions of employment, to ensure they meet the needs of contemporary workplaces; The final two terms of reference read — 3. The review should make recommendations with respect to existing structures including the WAIRC and the Coal Industry Tribunal of Western Australia. 4. The review must consider the likely impact of any changes to the State industrial relations system on public sector employment. I therefore now have a report with 193 recommendations. Some issues still need to be considered with some stakeholders. I am going through them now. When I have decided which way to go, I will consult with some of my colleagues, I will put a submission up to cabinet and cabinet will make a decision. Once we have made a decision on which aspects of the review we will adopt, we will introduce those changes and then the report will be free to be released. Mr F.M. Logan: Did you get your money’s worth, minister? Mr W.R. MARMION: The member for Cockburn raised the issue of the cost of the report, which is a little outside the subject of the motion, but it is a fair enough question. There is no denying that the final cost was substantial, but in terms of the current state industrial relations system—which is a very expensive system and which I fund—it is not a big component. Mr F.M. Logan: Did you get your money’s worth? Mr W.R. MARMION: I think so.

5054 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr F.M. Logan: Did you? Mr W.R. MARMION: With 400 pages and 193 recommendations. Mr F.M. Logan: We know what it cost! Mr W.R. MARMION: The cost must be considered in the broader context of the benefits that it will ultimately deliver. The benefits may perhaps be ascertained later when we see which recommendations I take up. Nevertheless, a report is a report and even if all its recommendations are not taken up, it informs people, including the minister, about some of the issues. As I mentioned before, it was very convenient for me as the new minister to have such a comprehensive report to go through. If members opposite are interested in my views on industrial relations, I will tell them that I am committed to genuine flexibility. Mr F.M. Logan: What is that? Mr W.R. MARMION: Genuine flexibility is flexibility that encourages workplace productivity, work–life balance, employment growth and appropriate safeguards for workers. They are the fundamental principles. I am committed to doing all that I can to look after the best interests of Western Australians—employers and employees alike. It is incumbent on me to carefully consider the recommendations in the Amendola report and to take them to cabinet. Once I have taken them to cabinet and cabinet has agreed, the government will release the Amendola report. MR W.J. JOHNSTON (Cannington) [3.41 pm]: The problem for the Liberal Party is in its DNA. We know what it is like; we know what it really wants, and that is the problem. The Liberal Party members have to stand and say, “We were wrong. For all those years that the Liberal Party campaigned to allow the wages of low-paid workers to be cut, we made a mistake.” Liberal Party members who voted for the Court government legislation in 1993 and 1996 need to admit that they made a mistake and that they also made a mistake when they backed John Howard when he introduced his industrial relations bill. The problem is that they cannot do that, because it is in their DNA. This is about what makes them Liberals. What makes them Liberals is their opposition to fair wages; their opposition to a centralised wage fixing system; and their opposition to rights for working people. That is what defines them. That is why they sit over there, on that side of the chamber. It will be very interesting to hear what the member for North West says during this debate, because the only reason he sits in this chamber is the personal support of Kevin Reynolds and the CFMEU. It will be very interesting to see which side of the chamber the member for North West sits during this debate. If he is true to his supporters, the people who put him in this place, Kevin Reynolds and the CFMEU, he will join the Labor Party in support of the resolution that has been moved. He will support Labor. If he wants to be honest, that is where he will stand. It is interesting that no National Party ministers are in the chamber. Where do they stand? Do they stand with the DNA of a Liberal Party that is opposed to Fair Work Australia? Do National Party members want to support fair work outcomes in Western Australian workplaces or will they join their Liberal comrades to vote against just outcomes for working people in this state? We know the code words the government uses. I refer to the government’s submission to the senate inquiry on the Fair Work Bill 2008 in which it stated — The WA Government does not support the broadening of the definition of “transfer of business” under the Bill. I will make a very important point about this; namely, this is the provision that protects working people when the business they work for is sold to another business. This is the provision that stops a new employer providing wages at a lower rate than the wage the person is currently employed at. Yet the Liberal government and the former minister have said that they are opposed to that fairness. They are opposed to guaranteeing working people that if their boss changes their conditions will not. It is nice and happy for former executives of organisations such as the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia to talk about flexibility in the workplace, but for a person on a low income, flexibility in the workplace means the flexibility to pay their mortgage, to pay their rent and to pay the cost of sending their kids to school. That is what that provision in the Fair Work Act does, yet this government opposes it. If members opposite have changed their minds since then, they should stand to say that they got it wrong; that they were wrong to oppose that provision in the Fair Work Act. Interestingly, that submission continues on, using code words, to state — In particular, the WA Government supports employers and employees being able to freely negotiate enterprise agreements with minimal third party involvement. It harks back, does it not, member for Nollamara, to the terms used by the former minister who was swept away in 2001 with a 10 per cent swing against him in his electorate. Although I am not quoting him exactly, he used to

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5055 say that the Liberal Party intended to have flexibility both above and below the minimum because it wanted to allow a reduction in pay for low–skilled starter jobs. That was the intention. It was not an accident; it was an intention of the Liberal Party’s industrial relations DNA. Happily, all Liberal Party members have to do now is to stand to say, “When we did that, we were wrong. We made a mistake. We were not acting in the interests of Western Australian working people; we were acting in the interests of blind ideology.” Again, the particular words about freedom of negotiation are interesting when we look at the member for Riverton’s words when he talks about his views on industrial relations. He stated — While Howard’s way is not perfect, it is a major step towards giving people more rights. In other words, more rights to have their pay cut, to be unfairly dismissed, and to not be paid the same amount when their boss changes. These are the things in the Liberal DNA. They are what defines members opposite. It is why they joined the Liberal Party. We just have to read the maiden speeches of some members opposite to see what they say about their motivation. The former minister talked about the dispute that he had with the miscellaneous workers’ union. This is what defines them. They cannot help themselves. It is not an accident. If I am wrong, members opposite should stand to say they got it wrong when they supported John Howard and Graham Kierath, and when they backed the Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s industrial relations agenda. They were mistakes. Get up and say it. If the Labor Party position on Fair Work is right, get up and say it. Get up and tell me, “Yes, Bill. You got it right. The Labor Party has been correct on industrial relations. We now recognise the fact that the overwhelming majority of Australians and Western Australians support the position of the Labor Party on industrial relations. For all those years, we were in the wilderness and we were getting it wrong.” I will go on to look at some of the other things that this government has said. It has said, and I am quoting exactly, that — The WA Government queries the need for a specialised low-paid bargaining stream … That is what this government has said. Unfortunately for the government, we are taking it at its word. We are taking it that when the government says something, it means it, and that means that we have no choice but to say that this is about the government’s DNA. This is about why members opposite are Liberals. We know that. We know that members opposite cannot help themselves. But if I am wrong, they should stand to say that for all those years the Liberal Party was making a mistake. Then there is unfair dismissal, and again I am quoting the government submission — The WA Government does not consider that the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code will provide small business employers with sufficient flexibility. Further down the page, the government goes on to say that it opposes — … the inclusion of short-term casuals when calculating whether an employer has fewer than 15 employees and is therefore a “small business employer” under the unfair dismissal provisions. It also states that it is opposed to the removal of the existing “genuine operational reasons” exclusion from the unfair dismissal laws and to the lack of a comprehensive definition of “serious misconduct”. Why? Because it is in the government’s DNA. It cannot help to provide adequate protections for working people. If I am wrong, members opposite should stand to say that they accept Fair Work Australia. It will be interesting to watch the member for North West to see how he votes. I come to the former minister’s media release of 27 May 2005, which reads — Western Australia needs to follow the Federal Government’s lead and make changes to its industrial relations system. In reference to the current Western Australian industrial relations system, the minister stated — “WA has the worst industrial relations system of any Australian state and this is one of the factors driving our business community … That is what he said. Is the member for Wanneroo saying that the former minister is correct? He agrees that he was part of that DNA of the Liberal Party. He is one of the people I have been referring to. If I am wrong, he should stand and say that he supports Fair Work Australia. The former Minister Buswell went on to say — … WA needed to realise its tremendous potential and was being hamstrung by the local system. That is the system that we have today. That is what the DNA of the Liberal Party is saying about these matters and those are what its real beliefs are. The Liberal Party now come into this place during an election campaign and suddenly, without any consultation, their federal leader reverses course and says that despite the party’s DNA on this issue, they are not going to tell

5056 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] the truth to the people of Western Australia and of the nation, and that they will lie to them and say that they do not care about the former Howard government position. They will say that they do not support workplace agreements and individual contracts and that they will provide protection to working people. We all know the truth, however, because they have told us what the truth is. We do not have to invent these things. It is not like the Premier comes into this place and puts words into the mouth of the opposition; this is about reading the thoughts and musings of members opposite. Mr C.C. Porter interjected. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: The member for Vasse went on to say — Reforms such as exemptions from our unfair dismissal laws, removing the setting of minimum wages from the Industrial Relations Commission … These are the things that are demonstrated. Here is what is said. The Attorney General just interjected on me, but this is what he is saying is a good thing. Exemptions from our unfair dismissal laws will allow people to be sacked unfairly. That is what he is saying. Mr C.C. Porter: When did I say that? Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: He just said it. In removing the setting of minimum wages from the Industrial Relations Commission, what is he saying? Is he saying that that is what he wants to do? Is he saying that he does not want a third party to set minimum standards? If I am wrong, he should stand and tell me that I am wrong. The problem here is that I am right. This is about what defines him and why he is a Liberal. It will be interesting to see how the National Party votes on this issue, because the National Party has been embarrassed by the Liberal Party before. It is clear why National Party members are embarrassed. It is because it is not credible to allow the federal Leader of the Opposition to lie to the people of the state about what his true agenda is. It will be interesting to hear the member for North West explain to Kevin Reynolds and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union what his position is. MR V.A. CATANIA (North West) [3.52 pm]: From hearing the member for Cannington, he has obviously had time to prepare his speech because he is definitely not working on the Labor Party campaign this time around! Mr C.C. Porter: They want competent people. Mr V.A. CATANIA: That is right. They are busy doing it on the east coast. We all know the track record of the National Party when it comes to industrial relations, which is probably a far better track record than the state Labor Party ever had. There has been talk about the statement of a week ago when the Minister for Regional Development announced the district allowance increase for public service workers in the Pilbara and Kimberley. They have got a massive increase. The position had not been reviewed for about 15 years. It is a $5 000 or $6 000 increase for each public sector worker. They never thought that would actually happen to them. It has taken this government to ensure that it could deliver it. Mr P. Papalia: You were standing next to your replacement in a photograph taken the other day. Mr V.A. CATANIA: The member for Warnbro obviously does not realise how important the increase has been to the public servants in regional Western Australia. It will stop police officers leaving the police force and it will stop many others leaving their jobs. Before we rose for the parliamentary recess the Public Sector Reform Bill was passing through the Parliament. When I met with the union members and discussed their issues, they raised the fact that the public sector was not able to access the Industrial Relations Commission. I asked them what the Labor Party was doing about it. They said that the Labor Party had not done anything about it for 10 years. I thought that I would move an amendment. I also thought that the Labor Party would probably move an amendment, but, no, it was up to me to move the amendment. I lobbied to make sure that members of the opposition were actually in the chamber to ensure that the amendment would be passed. They had not seen the amendment on the notice paper that tried to benefit public sector employees. When Labor members talk about industrial relations matters and how they protect the workers, I hope that they have the same strength they are showing here about industrial relations and support the private member’s bill that I read in today to ensure that the amendment can occur by changing parts of the industrial relations act to reflect the amendment that was passed before we rose. It is something that they failed to do. I know it was discussed between the opposition and the Labor Party when it was in government. It is something that they failed to act on. To the great champion of workers, may I say that when it comes to the constituents in my seat of the North West, I can put my hand on my heart and say that I have assisted and delivered such important reforms to the district allowance increase to ensure that we can protect public sector workers. When in government and when in opposition members opposite failed to highlight those inequities in the public sector management area. Members opposite should stop thinking that they can rake up the past. It is quite clear that the National Party has never supported WorkChoices federally. Members should look at the

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5057

National Party’s history on industrial relations matters, particularly during this term of government, and perhaps start looking at their own history and look at ways in which they can act on what they are saying. I think they are merely looking for a headline. They are grasping at straws because they are losing their support base on a daily basis. MR C.C. PORTER (Bateman — Attorney General) [3.57 pm]: I will make a few brief comments. The Leader of the Opposition has said that he was making a charge. I think the words were that the Amendola report contains a right-wing industrial relations agenda. The only way apparently that we can disprove that charge is to hand over the report right now, when that is not the government’s timing. Presumably on that basis one can make any sort of outlandish charge about any kind of government document and, as an opposition, control the timing of government. Of course, that is not how it works. When we look at the history of industrial relations the two types of reports that we generally see are about structure and federal–state relationships, which are generally reactive reports, or reports about root and branch reform that may contain matters of high or substantive policy. What we have said in response to the Leader of the Opposition’s charge that this is some right-wing conspiracy is that that is ridiculous and that the report does not contain anything of that nature whatsoever and, indeed, it is more of a structural or reactive report—of course, reacting to the single most significant High Court decision about federal–state relations in a century. What sane government would not commission a report to try to work out how we restructure a state industrial relations system after a decision of such large import? Members do not need to take my word for it, but I will read to them an article from the Australian Journal of Labour Law—that noted right-wing mouthpiece. It reads — The results of the state election in Western Australia in September 2008 when Labor was not returned to power changed the political dynamic—no longer was Labor in power in all states. Australia’s only non-Labor government at the present time has indicated that it will not be referring power over workplace matters to the Commonwealth. Early on Minister Buswell declared this to be his position. At the time of the 11 June 2009 communiqué Western Australia was conducting a review of its own laws, expected to take 4 months, and as a part of that review indicated that it would consider opportunities for the ‘harmonisation’ of its laws with the federal law. However, the lessons from other efforts at ‘harmonisation’ indicate that however well co-ordinated initially it is too easy for the separate systems rapidly to fall out of synchronicity, and so represents at this stage a very precarious basis for achieving real national uniformity. Ms J.M. Freeman: Who wrote that? Mr C.C. PORTER: I will tell the member in a moment; it is on my BlackBerry. I will get it for her as I continue to talk. There we have the Australian Journal of Labour Law giving an independent description of what this review is seeking to do and what its contents will be. The minister has read the terms of reference and there is no indication there of right-wing conspiracies. However, apparently the only way we can disprove an outlandish comment is to table a report that has not yet been considered by cabinet. If that is the standard that is being applied to government, we will be compelled to put out the state budget for public comment because someone says that it contains a Masonic conspiracy to take over world banking. It is an absolutely ridiculous thing. Ms J.M. Freeman: You haven’t tried to take over world banking before, but you have tried to “reform” laws to undermine workers. Mr C.C. PORTER: What we say is that the opposition’s statements and accusations are equally outlandish. Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER: Yes, the conspiracy theorists are alive and well. I will refer to one more thing before I finish. I will refer to a minority judgement of His Honour Justice Kirby in which he stated — It was self-evident that the corporations power did not extend so far as the majority now holds it to do. … popular approval for the enlargement of federal power with respect to industrial disputes. The repeated negative voice of the Australian people, as electors, in votes on these referendums, is now effectively ignored or treated as irrelevant by the majority. … to permit federal laws on a wide range of activities of trading and financial corporations in keeping with their expanding role in the nation’s affairs and economic life. Can be seen to be fair — But there are limits. … Once a constitutional Rubicon such as this is crossed, there is rarely a going back.

5058 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

What sane government would not undertake a structural review of the state’s industrial relations system after a minority decision of that import? MS J.M. FREEMAN (Nollamara) [4.01 pm]: I am happy to rise on this matter of public interest. The points that have been put by the opposition are very pertinent. On the basis of the government’s actions and its previous views, it is not outlandish to believe that the Amendola report is designed to bring back WorkChoices. The terms of reference go to those crux issues that are such ideological points for the Liberal Party—unfair dismissal and taking away the rights of workers to be able to challenge unfair dismissals and maintain stability of employment. Right of entry is another issue that we have been talking about; right of entry in this state is such that proper notification exists, but there is also proper capacity for workers to be represented in the workplace. The previous Liberal government took away the right for minimum wages to be set by an independent arbitrator, the Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission. Wages were held down for up to three years so that they lagged behind wages in the rest of Australia by $50. This is the form of the Liberal government, and this is the form, one can only assume, of the Amendola review. The government will not release the review; we do not know what is in it, but we know what the government wants to be in it. The government wants to bring back the things that it is ideologically committed to in terms of WorkChoices. Mr T.R. Buswell: How is your crystal ball going? Ms J.M. FREEMAN: I do not need a crystal ball. I was there when workers had their wages undermined to below the safety net. I was there when employers were put in this situation—employers who I used to work with, and who wanted the safety net system to remain, but saw it cut away by the previous Liberal government’s ideological commitment to undercut minimum wages, to pay people low wages and to force employers to bargain and bid down workers’ wages, such that they were placed in untenable positions. That is where I was— watching cleaners, gardeners and childcare workers lose their wages. I have to address what the Premier said about employers hating unions, or disliking unions. We worked with all those employers, and we worked well with them. In fact, we would give many of those employers information about the safety net and award wages. We often worked with them, and still do. The Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union works with many small businesses on collective agreements, all through the industry. The other myth is that this is all about small business. At least 300 000 people will be covered by the Liberal government’s legislation, which will undermine the lowest paid workers in unincorporated businesses. Small business is mostly incorporated, and small business will mostly be covered by federal Fair Work legislation. The government’s legislation will attack only the most vulnerable people in our community, who need a good, safe workplace and a good — Mr C.C. Porter: Do you still want to nationalise the banks? Ms J.M. FREEMAN: The form of the Liberal Party is that it always wants to — Mr C.C. Porter: Things change, don’t they? Ms J.M. FREEMAN: Not in the Liberal Party. If things have changed, release the report so that we know what is in it. The government is holding it back because the current federal Liberal Party leader talks in glib phrases in his budget speech about his love of undermining workers’ wages through WorkChoices, and he is still committed to undermining unfair dismissal laws. Question put and a division taken with the following result — Ayes (25) Ms L.L. Baker Mr F.M. Logan Mr E.S. Ripper Mr P.B. Watson Ms A.S. Carles Mr M. McGowan Mrs M.H. Roberts Mr M.P. Whitely Mr R.H. Cook Mr M.P. Murray Ms R. Saffioti Mr B.S. Wyatt Ms J.M. Freeman Mr A.P. O’Gorman Mr T.G. Stephens Mr D.A. Templeman (Teller) Mr J.N. Hyde Mr P. Papalia Mr C.J. Tallentire Mr W.J. Johnston Mr J.R. Quigley Mr P.C. Tinley Mr J.C. Kobelke Ms M.M. Quirk Mr A.J. Waddell Noes (29) Mr P. Abetz Dr E. Constable Dr G.G. Jacobs Mr D.T. Redman Mr F.A. Alban Mr M.J. Cowper Mr R.F. Johnson Mr A.J. Simpson Mr C.J. Barnett Mr J.H.D. Day Mr A. Krsticevic Mr M.W. Sutherland Mr I.C. Blayney Mr J.M. Francis Mr W.R. Marmion Mr T.K. Waldron Mr J.J.M. Bowler Mr B.J. Grylls Mr P.T. Miles Mr J.E. McGrath (Teller) Mr T.R. Buswell Dr K.D. Hames Ms A.R. Mitchell Mr G.M. Castrilli Mrs L.M. Harvey Dr M.D. Nahan Mr V.A. Catania Mr A.P. Jacob Mr C.C. Porter

Pair Mrs C.A. Martin Mr I.M. Britza Question thus negatived.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5059

BILLS Returned 1. Retail Trading Hours Amendment (Joondalup Special Trading Precinct) Bill 2009. 2. Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Recurrent 2010–11 Bill 2010. 3. Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Capital 2010–11 Bill 2010. 4. Railway (Tilley to Karara) Bill 2010. 5. Railway (Butler to Brighton) Bill 2009. 6. Land Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2010. Bills returned from the Council without amendment. 7. Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill 2009. Bill returned from the Council with amendments. APPROVALS AND RELATED REFORMS (NO. 4) (PLANNING) BILL 2009 As to Consideration in Detail By leave, resolved, on motion by Mr J.H.D. Day (Minister for Planning) — That consideration in detail be made an order of the day for a later stage of the sitting. [Continued on page 5100.] BILLS Assent Messages from the Governor received and read notifying assent to the following bills — 1. Credit (Commonwealth Powers) Bill 2010. 2. Credit (Commonwealth Powers) (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2010. 3. Pay-roll Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2010. 4. Criminal Code Amendment (Identity Crime) Bill 2009. 5. Revenue Laws Amendment and Repeal Bill 2010. 6. Rail Safety Bill 2009. 7. Standardisation of Formatting Bill 2009. 8. Road Traffic Amendment Bill 2010. 9. Child Pornography and Exploitation Material and Classification Legislation Amendment Bill 2009. 10. Retail Trading Hours Amendment (Joondalup Special Trading Precinct) Bill 2009. 11. Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Recurrent 2010–11 Bill 2010. 12. Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Capital 2010–11 Bill 2010. 13. Railway (Tilley to Karara) Bill 2010. 14. Railway (Butler to Brighton) Bill 2009. 15. Land Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2010. BILLS Appropriations Messages from the Governor received and read recommending appropriations for the following bills — 1. Police Amendment Bill 2010. 2. Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill 2010. PETROLEUM AND ENERGY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2009 First Reading Bill read a first time, on motion by Mr W.R. Marmion (Minister for Commerce). Explanatory memorandum presented by the minister.

5060 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Second Reading MR W.R. MARMION (Nedlands — Minister for Commerce) [4.17 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. This bill seeks to amend the state’s upstream petroleum legislation that regulates the exploration for and production of the state’s petroleum resources as well as the transport of petroleum by way of pipelines. These amendments will also affect the rules and principles applying to geothermal titles in the onshore legislation. The acts proposed to be amended are the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967, the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 and the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969. Under the terms of the 1979 “Offshore constitutional settlement”, the states and the Northern Territory agreed to maintain, as far as practicable, common principles, rules and practices in the regulation of petroleum exploration and production in state waters with those of the commonwealth. This is often referred to as the common mining code. Western Australia has pragmatically also adopted the common petroleum mining code for its onshore areas. The amendments to the state’s petroleum legislation now proposed by this bill reflect as far as practicable changes made to the commonwealth’s petroleum legislation in recent years. As such, the bill, when introduced into the Legislative Council, was referred to the Standing Committee on Uniform Legislation and Statutes Review as it was a bill to which standing order 230A applied. Following the tabling of the committee’s report, a number of amendments were made that deleted the minimalist interim CO2 storage amendments from the bill, together with the deletion of the proposed change to only one midterm review for a retention lease, retaining instead the current possible two reviews if required. The common petroleum mining code amendments form the bulk of the bill. These amendments will — • enable the ranking of competitive bids received for the grant of an exploration permit; • revise provisions dealing with the renewal of exploration permits, as, presently, permits can be renewed indefinitely and these amendments restrict the number of renewal terms to two; • remove the present discretion that allows 16 or fewer graticular blocks to be renewed without relinquishment—as a transitional measure, existing permits will be allowed one further renewal without relinquishment; • allow production and pipeline licences to be granted for indefinite terms commensurate with the productive life of a field rather than for the current fixed 21-year term plus renewals; • introduce infrastructure licences as a new type of title to be adopted only for the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 area as other forms of land tenure are available onshore; • introduce provisions for the management of a titleholder’s geotechnical data, later public release of non- confidential elements of that data and provide for the drafting of data management regulations; • enable the introduction of environmental management plans for petroleum operational activities to be controlled by regulations; • reword definitions to reflect nomenclature in the commonwealth’s “plain English” Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006; and • dispense with the need for applications to be made in accordance with “approved forms”. As well as the indefinite terms for pipeline licences mentioned above, amendments to the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969 will remove from the requirements of the act the current exemption for pipeline construction that is currently enjoyed by public authorities. The bill also amends the delegation provision to enable the minister’s powers to be delegated to any person, in order to align the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969 with other Western Australian petroleum legislation. The last major amendment is to apply a minimum royalty rate of five per cent for petroleum that meets the definition of “tight gas” in the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967. Tight gas is natural gas produced from reservoirs that require extensive drilling and stimulation to extract gas at commercial rates. The tight-gas industry is well developed in Canada and in other parts of North America but is in its infancy in Australia. Gas resources in the South West currently viewed as tight gas could potentially hold enough gas to satisfy much of the state’s needs far into the future. To encourage the development of these resources, amendments defining “tight gas” will result in a possible range of between five per cent and 12.5 per cent for royalties on projects that meet this definition. Although these additional amendments are relatively straightforward, they are likely to be equally as important as the proposed alignments to the common petroleum mining code. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr D.A. Templeman.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5061

IRON ORE AGREEMENTS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2010 Second Reading Resumed from 23 June. MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont — Leader of the Opposition) [4.22 pm]: I indicate that I am not the lead speaker for the Opposition on this legislation. Nevertheless, I want to take this opportunity to raise some issues that have relevance to this debate. Mr R.F. Johnson: Who is the lead speaker? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The lead speaker is the shadow Minister for State Development. The opposition welcomes the negotiations between the iron ore mining companies and the government that have led to the ending of concessional iron ore royalties. However, we will be pursuing the full extent of the negotiations and the trade-offs that the government had to make to achieve this result. My colleague the shadow Minister for State Development and member for Rockingham will deal with those issues. The first issue I want to raise is that the Minister for State Development, the Premier, and the state of Western Australia have been lucky in these negotiations. When the Premier came to power, he had on his table the outcome of negotiations between the previous government and the mining companies for the ending of concessional iron ore royalties on new projects. The Premier chose not to proceed with those negotiations and potentially, as a result of that decision, gave up $500 million in government revenue over the forward estimates period. That might well have meant that that $500 million was lost to the state of Western Australia forever, all because of the Premier’s decision not to proceed with those negotiations. Fortunately for the Premier, and fortunately for the people of Western Australia, BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto announced that they wanted to enter into a production joint venture. However, in order for BHP and Rio to enter into that production joint venture and to realise $10 billion in synergies, amendments had to be made to the state agreement acts that govern their operations. That gave the Premier and the state of Western Australia another opportunity to negotiate the ending of concessional iron ore royalties. We are fortunate as a state that that opportunity came along. Had that opportunity not come along, the Premier’s decision not to proceed with the Carpenter government’s negotiated outcome would have deprived the people of this state of the benefit of additional income of $500 million over four years from iron ore royalties. The second issue I want to raise is whether royalty income remains in Western Australia for the benefit of Western Australians. In a technical sense, the royalty income that we raise from the mining industry does stay with Western Australians. It is important income to pay for infrastructure and for services. However, there is a serious qualification to that argument. That qualification is that the more royalty income we receive, the less we receive in goods and services tax income. Why is our share of GST income now only 68 per cent of our per capita entitlement? The answer is that we are earning more in royalty income. The reduction in our GST share means that our royalty income is in effect being redistributed to other states. It takes a while for that to happen. It takes two years for the data to get into the system. Also, the formula is based on a five-year rolling average. Therefore, it may be as long as seven years before the full impact of a royalty increase is reflected in a reduction in GST share. But it does happen. In the long run, this state retains only between 10 per cent and 30 per cent of its royalty income. That means, in effect, that any increase in this state’s royalty income is as much good news for the Premier of Tasmania, the Premier of South Australia or the Premier of Victoria and to the people of those states as it is for the Premier of Western Australia and the people of this state. There is a further complication that needs to be addressed here. The Commonwealth Grants Commission formula works on the basis of the royalty income that we could be receiving. In other words, it works on a basis that does not pay regard to whether we are actually receiving that income. If this state were to offer a concession on royalties, this state would lose GST income in the same way as we would were we to charge the full royalty rate. So, this state would be punished, in the form of a loss in our GST share, regardless of whether we charged the full royalty rate. It could be argued that the end of concessional iron ore royalties will not have the full impact on loss of GST share that it might otherwise have, because we have already lost our GST share. In fact, we have been paying, through our loss of GST share, for those concessional iron ore royalties for a very long period of time. Not all of Sir Charles Court’s legacy has been good for the state’s finances. The fact that concessional iron ore royalties were locked up in state agreements and could not be altered without the consent of the companies involved has caused this state to lose revenue in two ways—through loss of royalty income, and through loss of GST share as though we were charging the full royalty rate. This might lead people to conclude that the latest negotiations will mean that the full benefit of the additional royalty income will come to Western Australia and there will be no further loss of GST share as a result of this particular deal, because we have already lost that share of GST income in the same way as we would were we to charge the full royalty rate. When we were negotiating with the iron ore companies, I canvassed this particular

5062 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] proposition with the Department of Treasury and Finance. The advice that I received was that I was, unfortunately, being over-optimistic in my analysis. I was told that when the grants commission assesses what the full royalty rate is, it looks at the average effective royalty rates received across the country. Because Western Australia receives such a large proportion of the royalties received by governments across the country, any change to our effective royalty rate will have a pretty significant impact on the state average. Therefore, it will be the case, unfortunately, that this deal that the government has done, despite its being only the end of concessional iron ore royalties, will have a negative impact on our GST share. This argument—which is a bit complicated, I agree—leads me to my third point. I believe that this house is owed an analysis by the Department of Treasury and Finance of the full impact on state finances of this deal. I do not want the Minister for State Development, the Premier, to think that I am asking for something unreasonable. To understand the full impact of this deal on state finances, we need to look at the impact over, say, a 10-year period. It cannot be done on the back of an envelope. There are 1 250 or more factors considered by the Commonwealth Grants Commission. There is a small cadre of specialists in each state Treasury and in the Commonwealth Grants Commission who are the only people who properly understand the full impact of the system. When I was dealing with the Department of Treasury and Finance on this matter, I noted that one of our specialists had a PhD in mathematics, which indicates the sort of complexity that we are dealing with. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is probably the probability theory or the stochastic theory or something like that. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We needed that level of mathematical intelligence and capacity to deal with the black box that is the grants commission process. I am glad that concessional iron ore royalties will be removed. I think the iron ore industry is now in a significantly different position from the position it was in when it was building towns and establishing a new industry in a much less profitable environment in a very remote area of the country. The industry is now much more profitable than it was in those days, and there is no justification for the continuation of concessional iron ore royalties. However, to understand the full impact on state finances, we need to look at a 10-year period. We need to look at the loss of GST share, as well as the increase in royalties. Only the specialists in the Department of Treasury and Finance can provide us with that analysis. I suggest that if the Premier has not commissioned it, he commission an analysis and that he provide it to this house. MR M. McGOWAN (Rockingham) [4.31 pm]: I am the opposition’s lead speaker on this legislation. I start my comments by saying that the opposition will vote for this legislation if it indeed comes to a vote in this house, which I doubt it will. We will support the changes contained in the legislation. I will set out for members what the legislation will do. The Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 will amend a range of historic state agreement acts between the state and various entities—largely BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, or their predecessor organisations—that were entered into over a number of years dating back to the 1960s. Some of the existing legislation even refers to the terms “shillings” and “pounds” as the amounts in which royalties were assessed, indicating that some of that legislation was passed before 1966. The bill will change the royalty rate in each one of those eight or so state agreement acts from a concessional rate to the standard rate as contained in the Mining Regulations. The history of this matter is that when the iron ore deposits of the Pilbara were developed in the 1960s and 1970s, after the removal of the restriction on exporting iron ore to Japan that was in place in the 1950s, which restriction prevented earlier governments from exploiting those resources — Mr C.J. Barnett: It was to anyone, I think. Mr M. McGOWAN: To anyone, was it? Mr C.J. Barnett: It was believed that Australia lacked iron ore resources. Mr M. McGOWAN: I was not aware of that; I thought it was a hangover from the Second World War. Indeed, it might have been a hangover from the Second World War when we think about the events. Mr C.J. Barnett: No, my understanding is that it predated the war. Mr M. McGOWAN: In any event, there was a restriction on exporting iron ore, which for 15 years or so prevented the immediate post-war governments from exploiting the resources in the Pilbara. In the 1960s those export controls were removed by the commonwealth; therefore, there was an opportunity for the iron ore resources of the Pilbara to be exploited. A few companies took advantage of that. As I recall, the predecessors of BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto took up that opportunity, and in doing so they received a concession on the royalty payments required. The first reason for that concession was that in those days the companies assumed the responsibility for providing towns with services such as electricity, roads, housing, ports et cetera. Sports and community centres and the like were built by the companies throughout the Pilbara in towns such as Newman, Hedland, Paraburdoo and Wickham. Mr C.J. Barnett: Tom Price and Newman.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5063

Mr M. McGOWAN: And Tom Price; I missed one. All those facilities were provided and those towns were company towns; hence, the term “company town”. Of course, all those facilities cost money. The state said that if the companies were going to do that and save the state that expense, it would provide the companies with a reduced royalty requirement on their operations. The second reason that the royalty was reduced was that different sorts of ore were being mined—lump ore and fines ore. Fines ore was originally not as saleable. Apparently, in those days it was not as easy to go through the downstream processing in Japan and therefore it was not as valuable as lump ore. The companies wanted to be able to export a component of fines ore—30 or 40 per cent—but they said that because fines were of lower value, they should pay a lower royalty on fines. Mr C.J. Barnett: It needs to be fused into small rocky pieces into almost a synthetic lump, so there is an extra cost in processing. Mr M. McGOWAN: That is right, but I understand that these days it is not so difficult. In the 1950s, it was quite a process. I saw the Premier’s biography at an event the other day and I noted that he did geology in his first year at university. Obviously, he has retained something! Mr C.J. Barnett: I failed! I passed geology 10; it was the other hard stuff that I couldn’t pass! Mr M. McGOWAN: It might surprise the Premier to know that I tried to become a fighter pilot in the RAAF and I failed, too! In any event, fines ore received a lower royalty. Lump ore is the most attractive. It is just dug out and put on a ship, and when it goes into the steel mill, it is very easily converted from ore into steel via those processes. The companies throughout the Pilbara received concessions. In the intervening period since the 1960s and 1970s when these eight state agreement acts were put in place, a range of other miners have come along and a number of other projects have been put in place not only in the Pilbara, but also elsewhere in the state, including the Great Southern and Mid West. All those other projects pay the full royalty rate as contained in the Mining Regulations. The major companies, in particular Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton, the successor entities to the original companies, are paying a lower rate on the most easily mined and best iron ore in the Pilbara, yet the other companies throughout Western Australia are paying a higher rate of royalty on ore of lesser quality. I am sure that those other companies would have thought that the royalty rates should be evened up. The taxpayers of Western Australia might even have thought that they should get some more value out of the ore that is, at the end of the day, theirs. Over a considerable period from the 1990s onwards, there has been debate between governments and the companies to resolve this issue. Of course, the companies did not have to resolve the issue if they did not want to. Governments should not threaten state agreement acts; they are the basis of overseas investment in the iron ore and mining industry in Western Australia. The companies have come to various agreements over time. One agreement was put in place in 2005–06 under the former government but it was never ratified. The proposal for the joint venture that was announced a year or so ago between BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto provided for the resolution of these matters. Both companies want to merge some of their operations at an operational level. They do not want to change the ownership; they want to merge some of their operations at an operational level because that will improve the efficiency of the companies. They operate separate rail networks that run for hundreds of kilometres through the desert, they have separate rolling stock and they have separate ports. They operate in similar areas but under the existing agreements are unable to use each other’s infrastructure. In this day and age, obviously both companies can see the benefit of, and are of a mind to, agreeing to try to improve their operations by sharing their infrastructure. That is what they want to do. They reached that agreement a year or so ago and that has provided them with an opportunity to resolve a number of issues, of which the royalties issue was one. That was a good opportunity for the state also, and the state should, and has, taken the opportunity to resolve one of the issues, which is the royalties issue. A range of other issues are unresolved, and I will go over those in the course of this debate. The issue of royalties will be resolved irrespective of when the legislation is passed. It will be passed this session, but the royalty payments will be backdated to 30 July this year. The state will be the beneficiary of a little over $1 billion over a four-year period, plus it will receive a one-off payment of $350 million. I want to address a range of issues involved with that. Resolving the royalties issue was a good thing and the proposed merger provided that opportunity. I have read some of the Premier’s statements on these sorts of things over a considerable time. I read a speech the Premier gave in the United States in which he said that he has been on the case on this issue since the 1990s. His address at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy in Texas is interesting. It was quite a long address and was well written. The Premier has been on the case of resolving the matter of the iron ore royalties since the 1990s. He claims in his speech that it was his idea to inject carbon dioxide under Barrow Island. Mr C.J. Barnett: It was.

5064 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr M. McGOWAN: The Premier came up with that. At the end of the speech, he says that in the 1990s he was flying down from the Pilbara with Vice-Premier Zhu Rongji, the fellow who was the number two in China. The Premier said in his speech that he talked the pilot into doing a low-altitude figure-eight flight over the North West Shelf and that as a result of that flight we started selling gas to China. A few issues were resolved just by the Premier’s intervention. He, of course, invented the idea that we should fix the royalty rates and inject CO2 under Barrow Island, even though he opposed the development of Barrow Island! He did a figure-eight flight over the North West Shelf with Zhu Rongji and as a consequence we started selling gas to China. I am wondering whether the Premier also invented the internet! Mr R.H. Cook: But he opposed it first! Mr M. McGOWAN: He opposed the internet at first, but it was his idea back in the 1980s to link together all the computers around the world! He also came up with the idea of powered flight! When John F. Kennedy said in 1961 that America would send a man to the moon, he had just been on the phone to one Colin Barnett from Cottesloe to discuss the idea! He is a man who comes up with some great ideas. The figure-eight flight over the North West Shelf has resulted in everything that has gone on in China today. Mr C.J. Barnett: I know that you are being funny, and that is a fair call, but that is not a claim I make at all. Mr M. McGOWAN: Inventing the internet? Mr C.J. Barnett: No; forget it. Mr M. McGOWAN: Which one does the Premier not claim? Mr C.J. Barnett: The point I was making in that address, which I have made publicly a lot of times, is that often significant progress or events can get underway by almost anecdotal events like doing a figure-eight flight or having a chance meeting or a personal relationships with someone. That is what I was talking about. The figure- eight flight over the North West Shelf project was something that Zhu Rongji referred to that night at the dinner, which Labor opposition representatives would have attended. The now Leader of the Opposition was probably there. Mr M. McGOWAN: I will ask him whether he recalls that. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is a minor thing, but the point is that events like that often trigger major agreements. Sometimes it is a chance anecdote or encounter. That is the reality and that is something that the business world does not well understand. That is the point I was making in Houston. I have an example of that occurring this morning, which I will not tell you about but which will have enormous implications to the state, and there was another one last week. Ms R. Saffioti interjected. Mr C.J. Barnett: Don’t be silly. Mr M. McGOWAN: The Premier has titillated us with whatever happened this morning; he cannot throw that out there and then not tell us. Where was the Premier this morning? Mr C.J. Barnett: When it is agreed to, I will make a statement. I am sure that you will be supportive of it. Mr M. McGOWAN: Were you doing anything this morning with Tony Abbott? Mr C.J. Barnett: I attended Tony Abbott’s excellent launch in Brisbane on Sunday. Mr M. McGOWAN: We are not opening a Speedo manufacturing business here in Western Australia as consequence, are we? In any event, no doubt the people of the state appreciate the fact that the Premier has achieved all those things through those amazing activities that he has undertaken, such as a figure-eight flight and so forth. Back to — Mr T.G. Stephens: Reality! Mr M. McGOWAN: Back to the real world. Mr C.J. Barnett: Do you see why some of your members opposite were never taken seriously when you were in government? Not you, but some of your members. There is a flippancy that your government displayed that offended so many international customers of WA, such as the Japanese, for example. The flippancy that you displayed in government was a major problem for this state. Mr M. McGOWAN: I am unaware of what the Premier is referring to, but I was always very respectful of the people I met with. Mr C.J. Barnett: I excluded you from my comment.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5065

Mr M. McGOWAN: There was a massive amount of overseas investment in Western Australia during our term of government that resulted in 170 new mines being developed in WA. I have always claimed that South Australia went from having five to 10 mines; it went from having five mines to 13 mines in that time. That figure was provided to me the other day by a senior bureaucrat from South Australia. South Australia went from having five to 13 mines; we went from having 200 mines, or thereabouts, to 370 on our watch. If we upset the people of Japan, they have a funny way of showing it by putting all that investment into Western Australia. We have always had a good relationship with the Japanese government and with Japanese investors, as indeed have I. Back to the issue of the rates. There will be an increase in the rates on these projects, which will take the royalty rate for fines ore from 3.75 per cent to 5.625 per cent. The rate for beneficiated ore will increase from 3.25 per cent to five per cent. Under the Mining Regulations 1981, beneficiated ore is — (iron ore that has been concentrated or upgraded otherwise than by crushing, screening, separating by hydrocloning or a similar technology, washing, scrubbing, trommelling or drying, or by a combination of 2 or more of those processes) I am not sure what trommelling is, but it is ore that has been concentrated or upgraded. Under this proposal there will be two new royalty rates—5.625 per cent for fines ore and five per cent for beneficiated ore. The main change—I think everyone would agree—would be on fines ore, but it is an increase in tax and it is retrospective. Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Mr M. McGOWAN: It is an increase in tax. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is not a tax. Mr M. McGOWAN: It is the Premier’s quaint point that it is not a tax. It is the price we pay for the ore. Whether the Premier calls it a tax or a royalty is a quaint point. Mr C.J. Barnett: No, it is an economic point. Mr M. McGOWAN: It is an increase. I am saying to the Minister for State Development, the Premier, that I agree with it. The company should pay for the ore. The ore is the property of the people of Western Australia. The company should pay for the right to mine the ore. I think some people actually forget that. The Premier mentioned the price of iron ore in his speech in the United States. I knew the price but I will quote the Premier so that it has the added authenticity of someone who has discovered — Mr C.J. Barnett: I am glad you are using it as a major reference document. I am very flattered. Mr M. McGOWAN: Someone who came up with the idea of injecting carbon dioxide under Barrow Island and who invented the internet and all those things — Ms R. Saffioti: Was that after he opposed it? Mr M. McGOWAN: That was before he opposed it. But someone who did all those sorts of things deserves to be quoted. As the Premier said on page 10 of his speech, the iron ore price has doubled this year. If the iron ore price has doubled and the industry is already hugely profitable, naturally it is far more profitable as a consequence. Therefore, one would say that the industry can afford to pay more. That is what is happening. This bill represents an arrangement that will apply to existing operations to increase the amount they pay for a mineral that is the property of the state. That is a good thing, and they can afford to do it. Other industries, as I have said in this house before, in particular those that are not as profitable and those that do not have the incredible capacity to pay that this industry has, perhaps should not have those increases put in place. We have had a bit of debate in this place before about gold; I do not think that debate is over. We have had a bit of debate about nickel and some other ores in Western Australia, because the profitability in the case of some of them is not there, and there is a large amount of downstream processing of some of those ores. I therefore think that there is probably a bit of a different case for some of those ores than there is in the case of iron ore. That is reflected, I think, in what is happening with this bill, as it deals only with iron ore. But I make the point again that this is an increase and an impost on the mining industry that applies to existing projects and is therefore retrospective; and it is an impost by government on the industry. Whether or not the Premier calls it a royalty or a tax, the average person—indeed most people, except the Premier—would think it is an interesting debating point but not really a matter of great moment. We have had the debate about the federal mining tax. I and the state opposition did say that the first model was flawed and needed to be changed. It has been changed. It has been changed with the agreement of Sam Walsh of Rio Tinto, with the agreement of Marius Kloppers of BHP Billiton and with the agreement of Xstrata—I am unaware of the name of Xstrata’s chief executive officer. However, the arrangement has been changed with the agreement of those three companies, and there is an ongoing process to work out the arrangements that will exist in the future.

5066 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

However, as the Premier said himself, the price of iron ore has doubled this year, and there is a greater capacity for industry to make a return to the people of Australia. I believe the new arrangement has been far improved on the old arrangement. The old arrangement was not good, but this arrangement in the Western Australian context basically applies to iron ore. Mr C.J. Barnett: I don’t want to start a debate, but I will just make an observation, and I am being absolutely truthful. I have not met a single person in the mining industry—I am talking about management level—who believes that the current Julia Gillard proposal will remain anything like it is now. That includes the major companies, the medium-sized companies and explorers; no-one believes this arrangement will stick. Mr M. McGOWAN: If Labor does not win the election, it will not. Mr C.J. Barnett: No; even if Labor wins the election, no-one believes it. There was the same view in Queensland when I spoke to a group of miners there. Mr M. McGOWAN: In any event, there is the Argus consultation committee, which I think will resolve a number of the outstanding issues. If the core point is whether there is a greater capacity to pay, I think there is. But if the core point is whether the government thinks there is a greater capacity to pay, the government is putting up the price on industry for existing projects right now. That is what we are discussing in this place today. Mr C.J. Barnett: And we are all in agreement that we are removing a concession. Mr M. McGOWAN: We are all in agreement. It is a retrospective matter. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is not retrospective. It applied from 1 July. Mr M. McGOWAN: I am using the Premier’s own language. It is applying to existing projects. Mr C.J. Barnett: All of which have been increasing. All the assets have been depreciated long ago for those companies—virtually all. Mr M. McGOWAN: I understand that as well, but they are projects that are already in place. This increase will apply to existing projects, not new projects. Although the amount of the mineral resource rent tax is higher, in principle the great objections were the retrospectivity and the application to existing projects. That is what is happening with this bill, and we are all in agreement on it, but they were the two most vehement objections. That is what the Liberal government of Western Australia is doing to the iron ore industry; the main industry in this state to which the mining tax will apply. It is applying an increased tax to an existing project that has been in place for a long time. It is not as much, I agree, but as the Premier said himself, the iron ore price has doubled this year. If the iron ore price has doubled this year for an industry that is already incredibly profitable, there is obviously a greater capacity to pay. Sam Walsh and Marius Kloppers obviously agree with that. In relation to the issues historically, the Premier made a speech in this house about all the things that should happen in the iron ore industry. The Premier has made many speeches in this house, so this one might not stick in his mind. He made a speech—perhaps when he was on the backbench in opposition—about what should happen in the Pilbara in resolution of these matters. An opposition member: Did he tell the truth and could you believe him? Mr M. McGOWAN: In the days of Matt Birney’s leadership, the Premier was extremely truthful in this place. He made a speech about all the things that should happen in resolution of these matters. One of them was rail access for smaller players. Rail access for smaller players, the Premier said, was not negotiable. Mr C.J. Barnett: I said there were three issues. Mr M. McGOWAN: The Premier was very clear that rail access for smaller players absolutely was one issue that had to be resolved. The other was local government rates. Mr C.J. Barnett: No; the other was a stamp duty issue. Mr M. McGOWAN: Sorry? Mr C.J. Barnett: Stamp duty—not rates. Mr M. McGOWAN: This is historic; this is not recent. Mr C.J. Barnett: I know. I put three issues on the table when BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto announced their proposed merger; they were royalties, stamp duty and rail access. Mr M. McGOWAN: Members might think with a six-week break that I would have found the speech. I did not have time to find it, although I have it somewhere. Mr C.J. Barnett: They were the three issues.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5067

Mr M. McGOWAN: The Premier was very firm, I thought, on the issue of rail access and local government rates, but I will speak about that anyway. Mr C.J. Barnett: Stamp duty. Mr M. McGOWAN: I can talk about stamp duty as well. I will start with stamp duty. The Premier is on the record initially—I am not talking way back, but recently—saying that those companies would pay stamp duty whether or not they were liable. Mr C.J. Barnett: No. Mr M. McGOWAN: That was the Premier’s first intervention in this debate. The Premier said they would pay stamp duty. When those two companies announced their joint venture, the Premier was very angry—I could not quite work out why—and said that they must pay stamp duty. He then backed off from that and came up with the premium payment arrangement. I think the Premier realised that it might give the impression that there was a risk to our reputation as an investment destination, but he was of the view that they must pay stamp duty. Mr C.J. Barnett: No. I made it very clear that I would not tolerate any contrivance to evade stamp duty. Mr M. McGOWAN: That is not fair enough in any event because it is not the Premier’s decision; it is the Commissioner of State Revenue’s decision. He decides whether or not the company pays stamp duty. He is an independent officer. Mr C.J. Barnett: According to the law, and the government and the Parliament can change the law. Mr M. McGOWAN: Therefore, the Premier would change the law if he did not like the decision of the Commissioner of State Revenue. Mr C.J. Barnett: When the initial announcement was made I had a concern that it may have been an attempt to try to avoid stamp duty. I made it very clear that if it was that, I would act. Now I am satisfied that as the detail has changed, it has emerged that is not the case. Whether or not the company is liable is determined by the tax commissioner, and how he determines will probably be as result of what the European Union and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission determine, so there is a long way to go on the stamp duty issue. Mr M. McGOWAN: If the EU knock it back, there will be nothing for the Premier to worry about. Mr C.J. Barnett: If the EU can determine it to be a merger, it will probably change the ruling. Mr M. McGOWAN: In my view, that is a matter for the Commissioner of State Revenue. The Premier was essentially of the view that the company should pay stamp duty. He initially said that the company would be paying stamp duty and then moved somewhat subsequent to that and said that he would let the Commissioner of State Revenue analyse the matter and decide whether or not the company should pay stamp duty, which is as it should be for a destination that wants to attract investment. I conducted a freedom of information search and found all the documents. The Premier then came out with the premium payment arrangement, which is another issue that I will talk about soon. I want to talk about the railway. The Minister for State Development, the Premier, is of the view that small players who have stranded assets should be able to access the major players’ railways. The major players put in the railways in the 1960s. There are two main spines, one of BHP Billiton and one of Rio Tinto. Those stranded assets are so-called because they are basically smaller deposits in the vicinity of one of the rail lines owned by someone else. The smaller player cannot afford to build its own railway, but if it can access a main line of BHP or Rio, that would mean it could exploit that resource. Rio and BHP obviously do not want competitors to use the assets that they constructed. As part of this package, the Premier’s original view was that that issue should be resolved and that the smaller players should get access to the main lines of BHP and Rio. The Premier has not done that. Mr C.J. Barnett: You are assuming that. Mr M. McGOWAN: This is the key point that I want to get to: I can only quote what the Premier has had to say on this issue in the press. I have been able to find only two comments in the press about what the Premier has said about trade-offs under this deal. They are not in the bill and they are not in the second reading speech. What the Premier is trading off is not in the legislation. I do not know when it is coming in and where it is. The second reading speech makes an oblique reference to it when it states in relation to the one-off payment — This amount will be paid once the other variations to the state agreements as required by the companies and agreed with the government pass through this Parliament and receive royal assent. I do not know where they are, but I would have thought that even though we are agreeing with this legislation, we should know what we are agreeing to. All the other stuff is bumf. This is the central point. We are agreeing to an increase in royalties but what is the trade-off? We do not actually know because it is not in the legislation. The Premier can put that interesting frown on his face all he likes, but all we understand has come from his press

5068 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] release and a comment in The West Australian. All we know about the trade-offs is contained in two paragraphs. The press release states that it will give companies the ability to share ports and rail infrastructure and blend iron ore, which should keep them competitive on international markets. In The West Australian the Premier said that we are allowing the integration and we have modernised the further downstream processing provisions and modernised the agreements. That is all we know. That is contained in about 30 words in total. The Premier has obliquely referred to the fact that he might be giving smaller players access to the railways. Is that true? Mr C.J. Barnett: No, I did not say that. Negotiations are going on at this stage, at least with one of the two companies, on haulage for small operators. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has determined haulage on the Goldsworthy and Robe lines. Goldsworthy may not be that important. So we are starting to get some movement on that issue. As to further processing, they are refinements and modernisation, and that in due course will become part of this agreement. This agreement is basically to adjust the royalties and to allow the companies to integrate infrastructure. The companies have basically conceded the royalty issue. The $350 million is recognition of the integration of their infrastructure. Mr M. McGOWAN: We should know. Mr C.J. Barnett: You do, because I had just told you. Mr M. McGOWAN: Okay. What is happening with the refinement of the downstream processing? Mr C.J. Barnett: There will be some further legislative change. This is what is necessary to get the increase in the royalty and the $350 million payment. Further changes will come into place, but there is no mystery about them; they are simply tidying up and modernising the agreement acts, because they are antiquated. As you said, there is pounds, shillings and pence in them. Mr M. McGOWAN: That is right, but irrespective of what the Minister for State Development, the Premier, has just said, I would like to know the detail of what we are trading off. I think that is fair. Mr C.J. Barnett: What we are trading off is their right to integrate. They cannot do that. What we are saying is that if they want to integrate their infrastructure, we—the state; the people—will extract a price, and that price is $350 million. Ms R. Saffioti: Is that it? Mr C.J. Barnett: That is it, and there will be some modernisation of some of the value-adding forward processing. Mr M. McGOWAN: What does that mean? Mr C.J. Barnett: It is nothing more or less than that they can connect their railways and they can blend their ore and use each other’s ports. That is it. Ms R. Saffioti: How much is it worth to them? Mr C.J. Barnett: Their claim is ultimately $10 billion over time. Ms R. Saffioti: It is worth $10 billion. Mr C.J. Barnett: That is what they claimed from day one. That was the whole justification for the negotiation between BHP and Rio. Mr M. McGOWAN: Surely the Premier can see the point that if we are debating the increase to the royalties, when, as part of that, the same agreements are in effect going to be changed as a consequence, we should actually have the whole picture. Mr C.J. Barnett: Well — Mr M. McGOWAN: Just let me finish. The Premier is saying that these are not major changes to the other agreements, and that is the basis of this. Mr C.J. Barnett: They are major changes and they are significant. Mr M. McGOWAN: Let us say in the so-called modernising of the downstream processing obligations there is something very significant in that. Once we agree to this and then maybe find something incredibly significant in that, we might say that we might not have agreed to it. Mr C.J. Barnett: You can oppose it when it comes to Parliament. Mr M. McGOWAN: Yes, but we think that we should have the right as a Parliament to examine what the Premier has agreed to. Mr C.J. Barnett: You will, and the Parliament will when it comes to Parliament Mr M. McGOWAN: The whole thing is a package.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5069

Mr C.J. Barnett: So you would happily defer hundreds of millions of dollars until we have resolved every other issue relating to the iron ore industry. I am sorry but I will not do that. Mr M. McGOWAN: The Premier has not read his own speech. In his speech he says that the payment of royalties will be backdated to 1 July. Whether it is passed now or in one month or two months, it does not matter. Mr C.J. Barnett: I am not backdating it. We have signed the agreement with the companies and they are paying the higher royalty already. Mr M. McGOWAN: They are paying a higher royalty. In any event, they will be paying, but we need to know, and I think the Parliament has a right to know, what the Premier has traded off; and I think we have a right to know now and not in the future. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is in the bill. Mr M. McGOWAN: It is not in the bill. Mr C.J. Barnett: There is no other deal. Mr M. McGOWAN: The Minister for State Development, the Premier, should show me where it is in the bill. Mr C.J. Barnett: There is no other deal, other than we have said that we intend also to modernise some of the provisions. Mr M. McGOWAN: So there will be another bill. Mr C.J. Barnett: Yes, there will. There will be further changes. Mr M. McGOWAN: So it is not in the bill. Mr C.J. Barnett: I have just said it three times. Mr M. McGOWAN: The Premier has just said that it is in the bill. Mr C.J. Barnett: What has been agreed is in this bill. We will continue to modernise the agreements and I will bring other changes to Parliament. Mr M. McGOWAN: That will be part of this entire arrangement. Mr C.J. Barnett: No, as further ongoing arrangements. What has been agreed is reflected in this bill. Mr M. McGOWAN: Seriously, the Premier is treating the Parliament and his own members with a bit of contempt. Mr W.J. Johnston: He is saying that he does not yet have an agreement on those other matters. Mr C.J. Barnett: We have an agreement to modernise other aspects of the bill. They will happen in due course and they will come to Parliament. Mr W.J. Johnston: But you don’t know what they are yet. Mr C.J. Barnett: The work is being negotiated between BHP Billiton, the State Solicitor and the Department of State Development. Mr W.J. Johnston: So you don’t know what the outcome will be. Mr C.J. Barnett: I know the outcome is $1 billion for Western Australia. Mr W.J. Johnston: But you don’t know what the benefit is to the companies. Mr C.J. Barnett: It will come here, and any other changes to the agreement acts will come to this Parliament. Mr W.J. Johnston: But the agreements are not done yet. Mr C.J. Barnett: Okay, let’s all give up, shall we, like you did in government, and achieve nothing. Mr W.J. Johnston: You haven’t achieved anything yet! Mr M. McGOWAN: The Premier has taken this amount of money, this increase in royalties, but he has not signed up the other bit. In effect, had the Premier wanted to—although I would not advocate doing so—he could have increased the royalty more and he could have received more as part of his premium payment at some point in the future in exchange, but he did not do that. He took this amount on the basis of something that is still being negotiated, whereas if he had perhaps not accepted this amount, we might have had a better deal. That is one interpretation of what has happened. Mr C.J. Barnett: You’re giving me an insight into why you couldn’t get a deal in government. Mr M. McGOWAN: We did not have the joint venture. Mr C.J. Barnett: You didn’t have the nous to crunch a deal.

5070 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr M. McGOWAN: We did not have the joint venture. Mr C.J. Barnett: Oh, okay. Mr M. McGOWAN: Hold on; maybe my memory is incorrect, but it was announced a year ago, and the Liberal and National parties formed government two years ago. Mr C.J. Barnett: No, this is the third attempt at a merger. Mr M. McGOWAN: Yes, but the Premier was a minister for eight years in the 1990s, and he did not achieve a deal then, either, when there was no joint venture. He did not achieve a deal even though, according to his speech, it was on his agenda. He did not achieve a deal; obviously the joint venture was the catalyst. Mr C.J. Barnett: Sure. Mr M. McGOWAN: I still recall the estimates hearing when the Premier said that something might fall from the sky; obviously, a week or so later, we knew what he meant when we saw what fell from the sky. However, the previous government did not have the joint venture, and of course we could not negotiate a deal without that sort of leverage. It gave the Premier huge leverage, and he knows it. Mr C.J. Barnett: I think you might have. Mr M. McGOWAN: Hold on; the Premier was resources minister for eight years and he could not achieve a deal. He could not achieve a deal after having been Premier for a year, until the joint venture came along. I think, on the balance of evidence, the Premier is speaking with a forked tongue on that one. Mr C.J. Barnett: History will show. Mr M. McGOWAN: What will history show? Mr C.J. Barnett: History will show that the Liberal–National government made a deal with BHP and Rio that got $1 billion for Western Australia. Mr M. McGOWAN: It will, and it is a good thing that we have lifted the royalty rate, but I think the Parliament should be treated with a little more respect so we know the full details, rather than the Premier’s 30 words and the short explanation he gave us a moment ago about modernising local content. What does that actually mean? Mr C.J. Barnett: I didn’t say “local content”; I said “value adding”. Mr M. McGOWAN: Value adding onshore. In effect, is a bit like a tax or a royalty; it is splitting hairs. In any event, I would like to have known the full detail. Does the Premier have any idea when it will be brought in? Mr C.J. Barnett: Our agreement is to make these amendments to allow the integration of the infrastructure and to increase the royalties, and there is an in-principle agreement to look at modernising the agreement acts as part of that. Mr M. McGOWAN: What if the Parliament does not support the future changes? Mr C.J. Barnett: This deal stands as it is, by itself. It is complete, and when this bill—under which companies are committed to paying the high royalties from 1 July—receives royal assent, they will send over a cheque for $350 million in addition. That is it. Mr M. McGOWAN: In any event, the Premier should provide a better explanation about what he has. I think he should have included it in this legislation, considering that he will be amending exactly the same bills. I think the Premier should have given Parliament a full explanation of all the trade-offs, so that we actually know what they are. Mr C.J. Barnett: You keep using the term “trade-offs”; it is modernisation. For example, we have had value- adding clauses in these bills for years that have never achieved successful value adding. Mr M. McGOWAN: They have to some degree. Mr C.J. Barnett: Not really. The HBI plan was the closest we got, and that failed. Mr M. McGOWAN: It did fail. Mr C.J. Barnett: Yes. Mr M. McGOWAN: Was that one of the Liberal Party’s ones? Mr C.J. Barnett: It was. Mr M. McGOWAN: I turn back to the other points. Stranded assets is one of the issues that the Premier indicated was incredibly important to him, and I actually agree, so I will be interested to see what comes out of that. He earlier made a cryptic reference about waiting and seeing what will come out of that. It might be something that is negotiated. Again, the issue of stranded deposits is something about which we should have

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5071 received better information. The opposition will also talk about local government rates. The member for Pilbara represents communities that would have liked to see local government rates issues resolved. They are now resolved for all future state agreement acts; it is now a standing condition that local government rates will be applied. In this renegotiation, there was an opportunity for the Premier to do that, but it appears, from all his commentary and from what he has just said, that that is not one of the issues that will be resolved as part of the new legislation that will be brought forward. I say to the Premier that those are two major issues that should be resolved as part of this legislation. I do not know whether the Premier wants to comment on that now, or whether he is of the view that the local government rates issue is a little too hard. Local governments in that part of the world would love to have seen the local government rates issue resolved, but obviously the Premier does not particularly want to comment on that. It is instructive, member for Pilbara, that the local government rates issue will not be resolved for the Town of Port Hedland and the other three shires in the Pilbara that would have liked to see that issue resolved. That finally brings us to the $350 million payment. It was an interesting manoeuvre; the Premier took the $350 million and put it straight towards the children’s hospital, because he knew that there would be considerable disquiet in the business community about that payment, and I think there is. Mr C.J. Barnett: I haven’t had one complaint—not one, apart from Labor members of Parliament. I haven’t had one person in the mining industry ever complain about that to me. Mr M. McGOWAN: Not to you, perhaps. Mr C.J. Barnett: Not one. Not one single person. In fact, I’ve had lots of people congratulate me and say, “What a great outcome”. Mr M. McGOWAN: I have heard a fair bit of disquiet about it. Liberal members should think about this: all it requires to change the law in Western Australia is a payment of $350 million. Liberal members should think about that and where they are coming from, and about it being an action of government to require a payment of that magnitude to change the law. How does that sit with the Liberal Party’s philosophical background? The opposition will support this legislation. When we go to consideration in detail, there will not be much in this legislation to discuss, but there might be a few things. However, there is not enough detail there for us to ask the real questions. We do not know the full detail of all the other negotiations, and it is obvious that all the other negotiations have not yet been concluded. Had they been concluded, we would have had some proper questions to ask, but considering they have not been concluded, we are unable to do so. I repeat: it would have been far better had all these matters been brought to the Parliament as a package so that we could examine them. Mr C.J. Barnett: We would be in the second term of government by the time we did all that. I can see why you guys weren’t able to crunch issues through. You just display it repeatedly in here. Mr M. McGOWAN: The Premier’s arrogance and pomposity is on display for everyone present. Mr C.J. Barnett: If it is arrogant to get a new children’s hospital, fully funded, then I’m arrogant. I’m willing to plead guilty. If that’s what you’re so against—a deal where our resources pay for a new children’s hospital—I don’t think you get it. Mr M. McGOWAN: There he goes again. Treating the Parliament properly would have meant that all the issues would be here for us to discuss, debate and examine, but they are not. When we go to the consideration in detail stage, there will be some very minor things to look at. Be that as it may, we will look at those minor things. MR T.G. STEPHENS (Pilbara) [5.19 pm]: One of the advantages of having been around the Pilbara region for an extended time is that one gets to see the comings and goings and discussions about the Pilbara iron ore industry. The companies retain the benefits of longstanding corporate knowledge of negotiations and discussions with government. Only too rarely, however, do I see in Parliament any display of longstanding corporate knowledge on the part of the parliamentarians and ministers who are engaged in the handling of public affairs to the benefit of all Western Australians. My first experience of the iron ore industry was in the late 1970s when I went to Cockatoo and Koolan Islands and saw small boats coming in from China. They seemed to be not much bigger than sampans. The boats displayed the Chinese flag. Back then, they were picking up the first small quantities of iron ore. On my first drive from the Kimberley into the Pilbara in 1980, I crossed the Goldsworthy line and saw what was largely an American company operating. The general manager of that company, Alf Kober, who was German, operated a very successful operation from Goldsworthy out to Shay Gap extracting good quality iron ore. The operation was eventually subsumed inside BHP. I have been lucky enough to be privy to discussions and commentary from the iron ore sector about its future, and about the future benefits for the Pilbara region and this state. I have watched agreements come and go. I have also watched the discussions about them. Some of those agreements were put in place by this Parliament—some by Labor administrations. Those agreements, if we

5072 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] believed them, would have resulted in new towns in the Pilbara region once ore bodies were extracting iron ore over and above the initial start-up phase of those mines. I watched from my electorate in the north west as towns like Shay Gap and Goldsworthy disappeared. Other resource towns no longer operate as the towns they once were. Cockatoo and Koolan Islands were vibrant communities, as were the townships of Telfer and Wittenoom. The community of Finucane Island was another vibrant, independent little community that operated with residents and had a whole life to itself. Life has changed in the Pilbara and in the north west over the 30-plus years that I have watched these iron ore operations. I remember the prediction made by the then mine manager at Newman—I think that was his title; it might have been a more elevated title—Peter Laver. He went on to a senior job in Canberra from BHP, as it was. He predicted in 1982, to the Labor team that was present, that the life of the Mt Newman mine site would be about 20 years. He said we could expect the Mt Newman mine to come to its conclusion and the town to cease operations after 20 years. That was the anticipated life of the mine at that time. Thirty years later, the successors to Peter Laver talk about iron ore extraction, on double current tonnages, from that part of the Pilbara going for at least another 70 years. That will double existing tonnages and will require an iron ore port in Port Hedland out into the outer harbour. It will involve producing vast quantities of iron ore long into the future; 70 years was his prediction. While in Singapore recently I had the opportunity to catch up with Rio Tinto’s iron ore export people. They are based there these days. They are marketing people. They told me that their expectations of the agreements they have struck with Guinea-Bissau, or the opportunities that were looming at that stage to develop a new mine in Guinea-Bissau, would result in the quadrupling of the longevity of Pilbara iron ore prospects. This expectation was because the Guinea-Bissau developments deliver for that company the chance to blend iron ore delivered from two parts of the globe. It will also produce for its customers a product that will secure the type of lower grade iron ore that is on offer in various parts of the Pilbara and can be blended with higher quality ore from other parts of the globe within Rio operations. We have to recognise that resource companies have had limited views in the past. They have passed on those limited views to the communities and governments they have dealt with. Regrettably, I have watched resource companies make frequent agreements to my colleagues, but these were never followed up with firm written agreements. These negotiations only created foundations for agreements and discussions between the government of Western Australia and those companies. I will give an example. BHP said it was putting in place an agreement that would lead to a major training operation at the Jigalong community that would deliver opportunities out of Jigalong for the training and employment of Aboriginal people that could benefit that community long into the future. It is 30 years since that promise was made to me. BHP Billiton now seems to be embarking upon delivering that 30-year-old commitment that underpinned its goodwill agreements that were developed with the Labor government in the early 1980s. BHP Billiton is no orphan in this regard. I have observed similar discussions with Woodside in its development of the Burrup project. There were to be jobs and facilities galore for the Aboriginal people of Roebourne and the Pilbara as a result of the Burrup development. If one believed the discussions that Woodside had when the Labor Party was in opposition in 1982—when I was first elected—and then as we went into government in 1983 and developed our relationship with Woodside, Roebourne was to have gutters lined with gold and streets paved with diamonds from the benefits that were to flow from the Woodside agreement. Instead, over 30 years I have watched Roebourne increasingly become an absolute backwater. There were about two Aboriginal people employed in Woodside operations up until about two years ago. Now, of course, with all eyes on the Kimberley hub, Woodside says it will deliver employment and training opportunities for the people of the Kimberley. I heard those comments 30 years ago but they were never delivered upon. However, I have watched Woodside lift its game in recent times. Finally, over the past couple of years, some training and employment opportunities have been put in place. I have watched BHP Billiton in recent times and Rio Tinto lift their game significantly in terms of the training and recruitment of Indigenous people. In reference to these resource agreements that are to be amended and will lift the payment for ore fines, we propose to support the increased cost to be worn by the resource sector as part of these agreements being struck. The Minister for State Development, the Premier, has described other agreements in place that will lead to benefits flowing to the Western Australian government. If the agreements are put in place by December 2010— in reference to the merged operations of Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton—we will see a cheque of $350 million delivered to the state government but nothing in place to secure benefits for the four Pilbara councils covered by these resource agreements. They are excluded from benefiting from the presence of large industrial infrastructure within their municipal boundaries. As a result, the biggest ratepayers in places like Port Hedland, Tom Price, Newman and Karratha—those organisations that own the shopping centres and have small amounts of infrastructure—end up paying more in rates for those sites than the amounts paid for the industrial sites occupied by multibillion-dollar enterprises.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5073

Yet the government had within its gift the opportunity of ensuring that, as part of this deal—of which this particular bill is just one part—the four councils and the communities that they serve would benefit from the ending of those exemptions from the payment of local government rates. That has not happened. The Premier did indicate to me, in an earlier discussion across the chamber, that he was prepared to come back to the house and tell us what progress he was making on this change. The Premier said that he did not want to see—he did not use this word, but this was the general issue—“gouging” by the communities. However, I think the boot is really on the other foot. The companies are in fact the ones that are benefiting only too well from these exemptions from the payment of local government rates. The councils can scarcely cope. The Shire of Ashburton in particular is struggling. The Town of Port Hedland has had a change of chief executive officer, because the former CEO has been head-hunted to work for the government, and vast numbers of other staff are leaving the shire. It is terribly difficult for those municipalities to recruit officers who can deliver all the basic functions that local government needs to deliver for communities across the Pilbara region. It is important that the local government rate exemptions provided for under these state agreements come to an end in double quick time. That was nearly completed when we were in government. The current government had the opportunity to rapidly conclude the work that had been done by previous ministers, including minister Bowler and other former ministers who are still on our side of the house and who did some quality work in advancing that issue. We in this Parliament should not fool ourselves into thinking that the Pilbara towns are entirely normalised shows. In fact, in 2000, the head of Hamersley Iron’s ore operations—its successor is now Pilbara Iron; the company has had a variety of different names in that process—had before him a recommendation that he was about to sign off on. I think the company had demolished 14 houses in the town up to that point. That recommendation was to demolish the whole town of Paraburdoo. However, he paused before he agreed to that proposal. During that pause, China exploded, and the demand for iron ore quickly turned around. As a result of that, instead of seeking to demolish Paraburdoo, he was left with the task of upgrading the single persons’ accommodation and recruiting more people and expanding the town rapidly to cope with the increase in demand. Paraburdoo is not a normalised town by any means. It is for all intents and purposes a company town. A similarly situation exists in Tom Price. People might suggest that because Tom Price is an “open town”, it is somehow normalised. Tom Price is a town in which the utilities are still delivered by Rio Tinto. That company delivers the power, water and sewerage support services for that community. The growth of that town is limited by Rio’s preparedness to allow for expansion. Therefore, if a competitor such as Fortescue wanted to put its workforce in that town—as it has been exploring to do in the past—it would effectively be prevented from doing that, because Rio can sit on the hose and stop the expansion of the basic services to that community and thereby prevent that competitor from coming into what is supposedly a normalised town. Work needs to be done in the Pilbara to normalise the region and make it possible for other iron ore and resource operations to stand alongside the majors and to take a solid place with them in providing local employment and training opportunities and benefits for the people of the region and the state. The problem is that there are large disincentives for small operators that want to come into the Pilbara region. A good example is Atlas Iron Limited. The very brilliant chief executive officer of that company is doing a massive job on the national stage by bleating about the national government’s resource tax. But I know that the biggest problem for that company is the lack of focus on its needs by the state government. For starters, the state government has failed to accelerate access by that company to the Goldsworthy iron ore railway line. I can tell the Minister for State Development, the Premier, that people have always said that if someone wants to have a good long sleep, the Goldsworthy railway line is the best place to throw down a swag, because the trains from BHP pass across it so rarely. That is an almost entirely unused piece of infrastructure. That is a massive resource that largely excludes all other players. Okay, agreements are in place that will slowly advance access for other companies to that operation. However, those agreements should be accelerated. [Member’s time extended.] Mr T.G. STEPHENS: As well as that, close to the Atlas operations are stranded ore bodies that are held by the major companies. Those ore bodies are simply holding operations. The ore in those bodies will never be extracted so that benefits will flow to the community. The profitability of Atlas would be enormously advanced if that company was given a bit of love and affection and attention from the government of Western Australia to help it resolve these issues in the company’s favour. That should be done in double quick time. However, rather than do that, the government is pretending with crocodile tears that it is the friend of companies such as Atlas. The government is bleating about the taxation agreements that are being struck at the national level. Instead of doing that, the government should be focusing on Atlas Iron, which is a wonderful little company, and on the prospects for that company to provide opportunities for the community. This government should get rid of its ideological blinkers to the issue of an interconnected power grid for the Pilbara. If the government elevated that grid and gave it sufficient priority, the various resource companies in the Pilbara would be able to cooperate and collaborate with the government, with the support of the national government, and provide a Pilbara power grid that would service the entire region and increase the productivity and profitability of those operations. The fears

5074 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] about the federal resource tax would then be only a small blip in terms of profitability when contrasted with the benefits that could be extracted from that interconnected power grid. Mr C.J. Barnett: Just so that I am clear, you support the mineral resource rent tax, do you? Mr T.G. STEPHENS: I believe that there will be the opportunity through the Argus committee to finetune that tax proposal and make it better. Mr C.J. Barnett: There may well be, but do you support it? Mr T.G. STEPHENS: Yes, and I will tell the Premier why. Last week, on the Nullagine road, two of my constituents were killed. That road has been badly degraded by the resource sector. That stretch of road, which is 0.8 kilometres south of the Fortescue Cloud Break turnoff, used to be a backwater. It used to be a safe road that station workers and Aboriginal people could travel along without any great fear or danger. I have been telling this house, I have been telling this government and I have been telling the resource sector that money is needed to make that road safe. However, there has been a failure to focus on that. If it requires a tax from the national government to deliver funds to make a road such as that safe, of course I will support such a tax. A $2 billion return for Western Australia on an infrastructure project such as that could have saved the lives of not only that family but also other people who may drift off that heavily corrugated and degraded road. There are iron ore camps in the Pilbara that are not safe because the companies have not properly made their workers safe. There are roads that are not safe and that are killing people. If it takes the national government to put some funds on the table as a result of a new taxation initiative such as this, so be it. I no longer believe the likes of Clive Palmer, Gina Rinehart and Twiggy Forrest when they say that they will stay focused on the needs of the Pilbara region. For too long I have listened to and seen too little from these players. The region requires not simply the generosity of billionaires; it requires the settings and frameworks of government to deliver benefits for the community of Western Australia and to make the developers of those resource projects provide some return to the region, including rates for the local councils, roads that are safe, and camps that are safe so that people do not die when a small breeze goes over the top. Point of Order Mr P.B. WATSON: The member for Riverton is calling out while he is not in his seat. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Will the member for Riverton settle down, please. Debate Resumed Mr T.G. STEPHENS: I support a focus by government on the infrastructure needs of the region. I object strenuously to the concept that governments simply look after their own coffers through bills such as this and fail to simultaneously put on the table a bill that will remove local government rate exemptions. The government has failed to deliver safe roads in an area of the resource-rich central Pilbara and instead is presiding over the destruction of those roads through neglect. People are at risk of loss of life or limb and at risk of injury and tragedy as a consequence of the government’s failure to focus. What happens in this state is that people spend time in the northern regions of the regional areas of Western Australia when they are young. They become decision makers as they move their way through the system, but they seem to make decisions based on their memory of the way things were done 30 years ago. Why do I know this is the case? I know this because I have knowledge of my part of the world. I have to keep familiarising myself, and so I realise that the road in that part of the world is no longer a sleepy road. It is a road that requires the full attention of government by directing the funds that will flow from this type of cash extraction from the resource sector back into those locations to make them safe. The communities of Tom Price and Paraburdoo need to see the completion of a safe, direct road from Tom Price and Paraburdoo to Karratha. What is the point of a government delivering a focus, as it says, on twin cities along the coast that will deliver services to the inland communities that are effectively cut off from those cities because there are not safe roads upon which to travel? The Minister for Regional Development has said in public and in Parliament that he has never seen people leave regional areas because of the state of the roads. Last week, two people left Nullagine in a box because of the state of the roads that they have been left with by this government. Two people are in hospital as a result of the state of the roads. The hospitals and morgues will be filled because of the government’s failure to deliver focus and attention on the roads that are needed by communities such as Tom Price and Paraburdoo. The inland communities of Newman, Nullagine and Marble Bar have every right to access the increased cash that is now being delivered into the coffers of Western Australia, rather than see a distracted government that cannot get its act together in responding to the challenge of the communities in the Pilbara. Mr C.J. Barnett: Do you support Pilbara Cities? Mr T.G. STEPHENS: Of course I do, but on the basis that it does not become an excuse for neglecting the needs of inland communities. When we were in government, the community of Tom Price told us about the need for the upgrade of Tom Price District Hospital. The fact that the Liberal Party has been elected to government

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5075 does not take away that need. The fact that that committee now seems to have gone quiet does not justify the government ignoring the Tom Price community’s need for hospital and health facilities. The government cannot justify it on the basis of putting a hospital facility in Karratha; this community is not connected to that hospital because the government will not invest in a safe, direct road that the community is entitled to and has long been seeking. There will be a dramatic injection of funds into the coffers of Western Australia as a result of this bill and the agreement that has been reached by the companies to merge their operations. There will be a $10 billion benefit for the companies and their shareholders if that merger takes place. The community of Western Australia will see a $350 million one-off payment, all of which I gather, will go to the children’s hospital. Yet the government will be delivering to the Pilbara region, for which I have the responsibility of advocating, more victims of neglected roads and more young children who are either killed or injured on roads that are no longer safe. These road users are competing with vast-sized iron ore rigs and uranium company trucks that tear up and down the roads as they try to become the first uranium operation in the state. Gold operations are expanding in the region. BC Iron Ltd hopes to put a private parallel bitumen road along the length and breadth of the Nullagine road so that it can shift its iron ore trucks, yet the government is ignoring the adjacent road. I will have the opportunity to speak again and again about these issues until the government realises that the Pilbara region is not the sort of place that can be neglected if it is looking after the interests of Western Australia. The entire state’s interests will be served by putting focus and attention on issues that are, in the overall scheme of things, small issues. There is, adjacent to the Atlas Iron Ltd operation, an unutilised iron ore resource that is currently held by BHP Billiton. Agreements come and go in this Parliament and the government could have said to BHP Billiton, “You haven’t done anything with the iron ore deposit near the Atlas operation for 30 years. What about surrendering that so that somebody can do something with it and produce some benefit for the people of Western Australia?” The government could have focused on that issue, which is a state responsibility, and simultaneously showed through that focus and attention that it is interested in these issues. Instead, the government seems to neglect its responsibilities. It does not find ways to keep the basic infrastructure in the regions safe. It takes money from the regions and does not have a fully integrated approach to these issues. Pilbara Cities has my entire support, but it needs to be backed up with connectivity to inland communities and a sensible approach to the infrastructure issues with which the region is faced. I say to the people who come to Parliament after me that resource companies, whether they be Woodside or BHP Billiton, have long memories, and their memories are improved when their arrangements with government are formalised and in black and white. The great lesson for me from watching it over the past 20 or 30 years is that I take their word for nothing until there is a binding agreement. And even then the binding state agreements need to be carefully monitored by Parliament and by government agencies to make sure that the companies are doing those things that they are obliged to do for the benefit of the people of that region, such as training and recruitment obligations, and not simply hand over the cash and run. For instance, in the town of Tom Price, the companies need to deliver power and water services to fulfil and discharge their obligations under these agreements. In the town of Pannawonica, the companies need to deliver quality school facilities under these agreements. Instead, school students too easily have to sit in neglected classrooms, despite the fact that the companies have the obligation under that statute to deliver the facilities for those schoolchildren. There is work to be done. The government needs to focus. MR V.A. CATANIA (North West) [5.50 pm]: When the member for Pilbara speaks, I sometimes forget that he is not a new member of Parliament. He has been a member for nearly 30 years. When he talks about everything that has not been achieved, it is a bit hypocritical of him to have a go at any side, and particularly to have a go at this government, which is actually delivering to regional Western Australia. However, I do sympathise with him about the people who die on the roads, especially as a result of once sleepy roads becoming busy. It is quite distressing that that occurs. We have an opportunity to put money back into the roads. The member for Pilbara mentioned the federal government. I have said in this place previously that even if members agree with the rent resource tax, they cannot agree to all the money leaving Western Australia and Western Australia not getting any benefit back from it, other than what has been proposed regarding upgrading the facilities to the airport. None of that money is being directed back into the Pilbara, which is where most of the money that will go to the eastern states is coming from. Dr M.D. Nahan: It is $7 billion. Mr V.A. CATANIA: It is $7 billion. Can members imagine how many roads could be fixed if the federal government matched our royalties for regions program and what an effect it would have on the supply of power and water and on the other amenities that are desperately needed? The Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 is a welcome start, but it does not go far enough. I am disappointed that the issues that were not tackled in these negotiations either were not placed on the table or have not been included in this bill. I will go through four issues that I believe need to be looked at and supported.

5076 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

I will not support any future amendments to the legislation unless these amendments are looked at. This is because I believe it is vital that if we do create a city in the north west, which we have well and truly started, we need to ensure that the resource companies get on board and make sure that they put their fair share of money on the table. As I said, it would be wonderful if the federal government of whatever political persuasion would follow suit and in its contributions reflect on what is happening in the Pilbara. I am most concerned about certain issues and I would love to see relevant amendments written into the state agreement because I believe the companies have neglected these issues. That is probably not their fault; past governments probably have not put enough pressure on companies such as Rio Tinto. Every time opposition members say that the government should do this or that, I remind them that they had the opportunity to introduce the amendments that the members for Rockingham and Pilbara spoke about. I was a part of that government that needed to make these changes, but they did not happen. As I said, the amendment that I will push for with this government is for local governments to have the ability to rate resource companies. If we want to create two cities in the Pilbara, local governments will need the authority to rate the resource companies to generate an income that will match the growth that is happening now and is expected to happen in the future. That is absolutely vital. If there is a question mark about Pilbara Cities, it is whether the local governments will have the ability to assist on making that development happen. There is a problem with the ability of local governments in the Pilbara to fulfil the state government’s vision; namely, to create two cities in the north. The member for Pilbara talked about the Indigenous community in Roebourne and what the resource sector has done for them. This is an opportunity to modernise the state agreement for Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton to include a good faith bargaining clause concerning traditional owners that will enable them to look at ways in which native title negotiations will not be held up by lawyers and which will not contain sneaky clauses that do not allow the traditional owners to progress their native title claim. That would overcome what is occurring at the moment in Roebourne with the Ngarluma Aboriginal Corporation, as it is finding it very difficult to deal with Rio Tinto regarding native title claims. If we want expansion and harmony and if we want to ensure that the traditional owners can go ahead, we need to ensure that they are part of this state agreement. I have seen how the resource companies have neglected the infrastructure of some of the smaller towns in the Pilbara, such as Wickham, Dampier and Roebourne, particularly Wickham and Dampier, which have been traditionally owned by the resource companies. Those towns have been left to become rundown and no-one knows who owns what. The Premier and the Minister for Regional Development signed a memorandum of understanding with Rio Tinto to try to work out ways to improve the amenities of Dampier, because it is a fantastic tourism destination in the Shire of Roebourne. We need to work on the opportunity to build a marina. The resource companies, particularly Rio Tinto, have neglected the towns. I will name Rio Tinto as much as possible because it should be shamed at not attending to the upkeep of the towns, such as Dampier and Wickham, of which it has been a part for so long. Places like Roebourne have been left to rot, basically. Only now are those towns getting the attention needed to revitalise them to ensure that there is at least some decent housing. That is something that previous governments have failed to do. The state government is leading the way in that respect. I have been extremely disappointed by the conversations I have had with Rio Tinto about who should do what and what level of input should come from the resource sector. We have an opportunity, and that opportunity is called royalties for regions. The state government is leading the way in putting dollars on the table, and, hopefully, it can attract matched funds from the resource sector and the federal government. The opportunities are there. The state government is willing to right the wrongs of the past, but there does not seem to be any will from the resource sector to do that—particularly from Rio Tinto. I would like to see in the state agreement a modernisation of the onus on Rio Tinto to ensure that towns such as Dampier, Wickham and Roebourne get a much-needed facelift and are provided with the amenities that are so desperately needed. The big issue at the moment, particularly in Karratha, is water. Who would have thought that in this day and age when there is such a large population in the Shire of Roebourne, particularly in Karratha, we would see potable water being used on dust suppression? It is absolutely crazy that there is not enough water to expand housing in Karratha because water is being allocated to the resource industry. We could fix the water problem tomorrow if Rio Tinto looked at its own supplies and ability to use alternative water sources at some of its sites rather than continuing to use drinking water to suppress dust. When there is a shortage of water and that shortage is hindering future development, it makes sense for companies like Rio Tinto to look at the ways in which they can deliver water to relieve the pressure on growth of the towns. Why should taxpayers pay for something that the mining company has had a good run at? It is time to modernise the agreement to reflect what is happening there today. That is probably one of the biggest issues that I would like to see fixed in any future negotiations and agreements. Mr P. Papalia: Are you going to advocate that the local government rating concession be revoked? Mr V.A. CATANIA: No; I firmly believe that local governments should be able to rate the resource sector. As I said, the towns should be able to take away a resource company’s right to use potable water for dust suppression

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5077 when there is a shortage of water. We would not have to build a desalination plant or look at other water sources if Rio Tinto looked after its own water supply. Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm Mr V.A. CATANIA: Before the dinner break I spoke about the smaller towns in the north west and how Rio Tinto has not pulled its weight to ensure that those towns could keep pace with what is going on in this state. I said to the Premier that we, as a government, need to be strong and that we should not approve any of Rio Tinto’s expansion plans for Cape Lambert. We should stand firm and say that we want the four points that I mentioned earlier to be amended in the state agreement so that we can modernise the agreement and ensure that areas like the Shire of Roebourne are able to fully fulfil the vision of the state government—that is, for Karratha to become a city. The member for Pilbara had a lot to say about roads and infrastructure but not once did he mention what the state government is doing with royalties for regions. Now I know why. During the dinner break I did a bit of research and found that a preference deal has been reached between the Labor Party and the Liberal Party in the seat of Durack for the coming federal election. It has been quite difficult to get any clear answer from the major parties on whether they support royalties for regions and whether they would match it dollar for dollar in the federal scene. The resources rent tax has not delivered any benefits to the Pilbara, where the royalties actually come from. It will continue to fund the deficit that is increasing on a day-by-day basis under the federal government. I did a bit of research and found that the Labor Party candidate, Shane Hill, is preferencing the Liberal Party in the seat of Durack. I find it quite amazing that the two major parties are ganging up on the only party that has started to deliver to regional WA through its royalties for regions program. The National Party is revitalising the inland towns of the Pilbara and is creating two cities in the north—Karratha and Port Hedland. It has also developed a Gascoyne revitalisation plan to fund to the tune of $150 million projects that the community has put forward. This preference deal surprises me, but, then again, it does not. It shows that the federal Labor government does not want to support royalties for regions. The federal Labor government wants to ensure that the National Party does not continue to gain ground in regional areas, which it has been doing by representing local communities in a local way by delivering royalties for regions. The federal Labor Party has done a deal with the federal Liberal Party to swap preferences. I find it quite amazing that it would set out to try to end royalties for regions. There is also the prospect of the federal resource rent tax, which could jeopardise royalties for regions. The detail of the proposed tax is as yet unknown. The federal government may collect all the royalty payments of the states and territories and then give back a proportion, as it does with the goods and services tax. We hold grave concerns about it. I will make sure that the community of the north west finds out tomorrow that the Labor Party has preferenced the Liberal Party in the seat of Durack. I am sure that the whole of the seat of Durack will know by tomorrow that this deal has been done between the Labor Party and the Liberal Party. All I can say is: shame on the Labor Party! I thought the Labor Party had some morals left, but those morals have obviously escaped—they must have left when I left. It is clear that I have taken them to this side! I return to the bill before us. The government needs to think long and hard about it. The opposition had its chance to amend the state agreements when it was in government. I commend the opposition for starting the process and for exploring the idea of implementing new state agreements to allow local governments to rate the resources sector, but I am very disappointed that it did not amend and modernise the state agreements when it had the opportunity to do so. It is a bit hypocritical for the opposition to now attack the state government for failing to do this or that when it failed to do those things when it was in government. The federal government has definitely failed the people of the Pilbara by not investing in the Pilbara at all. I urge the Minister for State Development, the Premier, to consider the amendments that I move this evening. They are absolutely vital if we want to create a vibrant city in the north, if we want local governments to be able to keep pace with what we are doing, and if we want the outer towns of the Shire of Roebourne, such as Dampier, Wickham and Roebourne, to really prosper and grow with Karratha. We need to ensure that Rio Tinto includes all those plans and puts them into action, so that those towns can become vibrant communities. I hope that the Premier will use whatever bargaining power he has. He should not allow Rio Tinto’s expansion plans at Cape Lambert to go ahead. I will do my best to make sure that those expansion plans are put on hold until Rio Tinto agrees to these amendments, which I believe are required for the development of cities in the north west. MR C.J. TALLENTIRE (Gosnells) [7.08 pm]: I am very pleased to speak to the Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010. It is fair to say that this bill is welcomed by all members of this house because it will remove the concessional royalty rates. This is needed because, for too long, two of the wealthiest and most profitable companies in this state have been able to continue their operations on the basis of agreements that were signed back in the Sir Charles Court era. As other members have pointed out, those state agreement acts are old. I do not believe that they really take account of the expectations of the community, which I will address in more detail. I also do not think that they really pick up on a basic equity issue of how the broader community can profit from these mineral resources, which, after all, we can dig up only once. I am the

5078 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] first to admit that all of us are the beneficiaries of the mineral wealth of this state of Western Australia, but I think we are getting to a point now when we have to weigh up the cost that comes with our mineral extraction activities. It would be completely wrong for any member of this place to imagine that mineral extraction is a benign activity; it comes with huge costs. There are social costs—I will touch on some of those—and there are also environmental costs. Therefore, if we are prepared to accept that we will suffer some degree of cost, we must make sure that we receive some adequate form of compensation, and that is where this royalty revenue really does come in. I maintain that the new amount of royalty revenue that has been set through this amendment bill is not adequate; we should be going a lot further. I was pleased to hear the member for North West touch on that very point. I want to turn, though, to some of the social costs that we have seen with mineral development in the Pilbara. I bow to the knowledge of the member for Pilbara, his passion for the region and his intimate knowledge of the Pilbara. I have observed on various occasions that I have been in the Pilbara that there are great extremes of wealth there. There are places, of course, that produce incredible amounts of wealth, and there are places right next door where there is abject poverty. People often refer to the comparison between Karratha, the activities on the Burrup and the plight of the community at Roebourne. That example is certainly one that people often consider. I have also observed the situation at Newman. I recall in 1998 passing by Newman and seeing the gated enclosure of the town of Newman and signs up saying that it was the tidy town of the year. Indeed, Newman had immaculate suburban Perth–style manicured lawns and there was a very happy well-to-do sense about the town. Then, outside the gates of the town of Newman, I saw the total poverty of the Parnpajinya community; an Aboriginal community that I believe is mostly made up of people from the Jigalong desert community, who came to Newman because they wanted to access alcohol and were staying in the terrible shanty town of Parnpajinya. I recall contacting Stedman Ellis who was at BHP at the time—he has now gone on to be deputy director general at the Department of Mines and Petroleum—and asking what action was going to be taken by BHP on this matter. He assured me that the company was very concerned and that all layers of government were very concerned that there was this outrageous level of poverty right next to an area which had a good quality of life and wealth and which was thriving on the exploitation of the nation’s wealth in the extraction of resources at the Mt Whaleback operation. I am sorry to hear from the member for Pilbara, though, that things have not moved on terribly much since I saw that in 1990. The Parnpajinya community is still living in a high degree of poverty. This argument about how our mineral, oil and gas wealth can be used to change and help the plight of Indigenous people has been used very frequently. I am yet to see a solid example of mineral wealth that has been converted into real significant advancement for the great many Indigenous people. Some have definitely been able to improve their lot in life, but there are far too many still left behind. That is something, therefore, that I remain concerned about. There are other social costs as well, not just for Indigenous people. It has to be said that there are many social costs that go with the fly in, fly out culture that is so very much embraced by the resources sector these days. People are seeing cases of marriage breakdown, relationship breakdown and general stress that go with the fly in, fly out culture. Other costs relate to the more social and economic side of our mining industry, such as infrastructure costs. As everyone knows, trying to find car parking at Perth Airport was just about impossible at one stage. I think it has improved in more recent times, but there was a time when there simply was no infrastructure in place to deal with the number of fly in, fly out workers. Of course, now we are talking about having to improve the traffic network around the airport and the upgrade that is necessary to the intersection at Tonkin Highway and Leach Highway—an enormously costly proposal. The necessary upgrade, though, has been brought on by the activity of our resources sector. It is therefore only reasonable that that resources sector be made to contribute to these costs. We must have a mechanism to do that. Things like royalties and mineral resource rent taxes are the way that we can gain the necessary funds to improve things; because if we leave it to the companies themselves, I do not think we will get the benefits that we need. I want to move on to the negative impacts of mining on the environment. We must weigh up whether we are getting enough of a royalty rate. Is a little more than five per cent adequate to compensate for the environmental loss that we face when it comes to the mining industry? The industry is very quick to say that when we look at it in terms of hectares, the actual footprint on the Pilbara is not enormous. But the reality is that, when we consider that through its operations Rio Tinto is exporting presently 225 million tonnes of iron ore a year, going up to 330 million tonnes in the next few years, and BHP’s iron ore operations involve similar amounts, we are not talking just about a footprint impact; we are talking about very dramatic landscape change. Those are enormous volumes and they do leave an impact on the environment. The issue is broader than just a change to the physical landscape; although on that I have an interesting anecdote. I received an anonymous email from a Rio Tinto employee who is at a place called the Auski Roadhouse. That person is involved in some exploration work about 30 kilometres away from the Auski Roadhouse. The message

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5079 that I got was: here is an area that we have discovered has high mineral prospectivity—the iron ore deposit is indeed a solid one—but we are going to be blowing that up. In fact it is an area that looks like a mini Bungle Bungles. That is the sort of landscape change that is being wrought on the state in the Pilbara region through this form of iron ore mining activity. Are we, therefore, gaining enough to compensate for that loss? It is a loss that many Western Australians do not even understand because they are totally unaware of our natural heritage in the Pilbara. I know also that there are significant amounts of Indigenous heritage there, which I will come to in a moment, but I want to stick with the theme of environmental loss. There are other things. For example, Rio Tinto’s expansion of the Hope Downs project led to dewatering of the Weeli Wooli springs. The dewatering was such that the water was then put down Weeli Wooli Creek. That might sound like there was a bit of mine activity going on causing some minor dewatering of a mine site. The volume of water involved was actually enormous— about 45 gigalitres a year. We have heard other speakers mention the problem of water supply in the Pilbara. Rio Tinto dewatering 45 gigalitres of water down the Weeli Wooli Creek a year has an Indigenous cultural impact; it impacts on the rainbow serpent there. That is upsetting for the traditional owners of the area. Forty-five gigalitres of water is about the same volume as our desalination produces; it is about 17 per cent of Perth’s annual water consumption. It is an enormous amount of water, and it is being dewatered—effectively going to waste. That kind of dewatering has led to the degradation of various ecosystems downstream of Weeli Wooli Springs that were dependent on the surface water. That has all been changed. That dramatic ecosystem change has been caused by mining activity. Is that justified by our receipt, previously of only 3.75 per cent, but now, wow, up to a little over five per cent of royalty revenue to the state of Western Australia? There is clearly a case for significant reforms of the way in which we gain benefit as a whole community from the activities of the mining industry. For that reason, I am fully supportive of the proposals put forward by Prime Minister Julia Gillard and the federal government. We need to put things into the context of profit levels. Rio Tinto recently announced a first- half net profit of some $6.4 billion. I also mentioned that Rio Tinto’s production is expanding from 225 million tonnes a year to 330 million tonnes a year. Rio Tinto is investing about $11 billion in its expansion operations. It is an absolutely huge scale. Members have referred a little in this debate to the longevity that we can expect from that iron ore resource. However, we are obviously talking about a resource that is depleting. I recall hearing the Premier talking about this issue—I think it could have been about 10 years ago—and saying at that time that to his knowledge we had about 200 years of iron ore remaining at the 1999–2000 level of extraction. Whereas now, I am hearing experts such as Peter Strachan, a well-recognised expert on the iron ore industry, estimating that at the present level of extraction we are probably looking at the depletion of the economically viable aspects of the resource within the next 80 years. There is nothing infinite about this resource. This is our natural capital. It is our resource, and we should not be giving it away for nothing. It is a resource that is depleting. By giving it away for a five per cent royalty I do not think that we are gaining the sort of wealth that we deserve and that will leave us with the quality of infrastructure that future generations will be able to point to as reflecting the return that we gained from extracting all that iron ore. We will not be able to say, “We have no more iron ore left as a result of that frenzied extraction of iron ore in 2010 and through to 2020, that China-fuelled enthusiasm for extracting iron ore, but we now have these monuments and facilities and these developments in Western Australian society that reflect the return that we gained from extracting all that iron ore.” The fact is that, basically, we are just too soft when it comes to negotiating with these companies. I notice that in the second reading speech on this bill the Minister for State Development, the Premier, said that the negotiations had been productive, albeit tough, over an extended period. I would really love to hear later on from the Premier some evidence that demonstrates how tough those negotiations were. When we look at the profit levels of these companies, it has to be said they are getting it pretty damn easy! I also hear from people who are in middle-level management at both Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton Iron Ore. Their view is that, of course, they could pay more and they would be totally viable if they were to pay more. They say, “Of course we are not going to be going off to Africa to set up there.” They have far too much infrastructure to do that. They are exceptionally profitable operations and they can afford to pay more. I only get to briefly shake hands with people like Sam Walsh, but I realise they say that there are difficulties for their companies when they are approached with requirements that they pay a bit more, but I think that the people who really have their eyes on the figures—those middle-level managers who are in the various mine viability areas—can see that it is totally feasible for them to be paying more. I am very concerned that there has been a debate at a national level where senior figures from the Liberal Party especially have tried to convince people who are working in the mining industry that they would be out of a job should there be any increase on the return that we as a whole community are seeking to gain from the extraction of iron ore. I have no doubt that the issue of changing a royalty regime, and changing regulation as well, sometimes evokes a degree of angst in companies. They love to react to it, and they are very quick to react. They have public relations firms that can immediately come out with quick responses to counter any government desire to extract a

5080 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] little more from their profit take. All too quickly I believe that the term “sovereign risk” gets raised. It needs to be very clear, when it comes to this issue of sovereign risk, that it is not a matter of sovereign risk when a nation or a state like Western Australia decides to increase its royalty rate or, indeed, impose regulations. To argue otherwise and to suggest that such changes somehow create this issue of sovereign risk or diminish our standing as a player on the international business stage and might somehow change our AAA credit rating would suggest that we are locked into the ideas and the policy settings of past generations. I find that totally unacceptable. Why should we as Western Australians today be satisfied with the royalty rate that Sir Charles Court and others agreed to many years ago? It has to be that we as a community are allowed to change our royalty regimes and our taxation regimes and to regulate where necessary to make sure that companies are brought into line with the expectations of the Western Australian community today. I believe that the state agreement acts that are involved here in many instances are old; not only that, there are concerns about state agreement acts in general. There is a view that perhaps we should not use state agreement acts in the future. I recall the Keating review of major project developments in Western Australia that was conducted during the time of the Gallop government. That review raised some serious questions about the use of state agreement acts. I suspect one reason for that was because they are not always effective mechanisms to gain the economic return that we as a state deserve. I support this legislation because it is a positive step forward, but I hope the Premier will be able to address some of my concerns. I am particularly interested to hear how this was supposedly a tough negotiation. My suspicion is that it was far too soft a series of negotiations. MR J.J.M. BOWLER (Kalgoorlie) [7.28 pm]: I rise to support this legislation and to congratulate and commend the Minister for State Development, the Premier, for what he has achieved for Western Australia. The Minister for State Development stated in his second reading speech that since 1996 successive governments had been trying to standardise and normalise royalties on fines and beneficiated ore. Indeed, as a backbencher, initially of the Gallop government, I worked a bit towards achieving that. I know that was a goal that the then Minister for Mines, Hon Clive Brown, was seeking to achieve, as was the Carpenter government later on. It is good that it has finally come to fruition, particularly considering that more recently we have a relatively new state agreement in the Pilbara—the Iron Ore (FMG Chichester Pty Ltd) Agreement Act 2006, which sees FMG, on the same ore and in the same region, paying the full tote odds that are now being imposed from here on. I was also involved in transferring the former Poseidon nickel agreement at Laverton. The then minister—once again Clive Brown—was surprised when the mining company that was taking over the state agreement from the former Western Mining Corporation said that it wanted to include such things as local government rates and some other provisions that will probably be normal into the future. That was done when that state agreement was transferred from Western Mining to the company that was reopening those Windarra leases. Therefore, this does not set a precedent; it is really just part of the normalisation of the mining industry in Western Australia, which is something that the government has brought to fruition. The federal election is less than a fortnight away. Although the context is that this is a state government negotiating for state royalties, we have recently had the debacle of Canberra trying to indicate to the rest of Australia that royalties somehow belong to Australians—they do not. The iron ore in Western Australia belongs to the people of Western Australia and the royalties on those minerals belong to Western Australia. Mr C.J. Tallentire: Have you got a Western Australian passport? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Of course, hang on — Mr C.J. Tallentire: There is no such thing as being a Western Australian citizen! Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: If the member wants to defend that, he can go sit in Canberra because — Mr C.J. Barnett: Is that the Labor position, is it? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Is that the member’s position? Does the member think that we should not have state royalties? Mr C.J. Tallentire: How can you claim that we are entitled to it especially as Western Australians, when we are a nation? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: But the member just supported this bill, did he not? Mr C.J. Tallentire: Yes, of course I did. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I just want to get this right: does the member not support this bill now? Mr C.J. Tallentire: Of course I do; I said I did.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5081

Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Okay. This really points out—as I said, the election is now less than a fortnight away— that it was the biggest land and money grab in Australian history to say suddenly that the mineral rights belong to all Australians. They do not; it is a state government that is imposing this and the state government receives royalties. Of course, member for Gosnells, as we can see through the federal government’s grants commission and the equalisation, I think we end up with about 15c in every dollar, that the rest of Australia does benefit. However, the right to impose those royalties belongs to Western Australians and that is what this government has done. As I say, everyone benefits; I think about 85c in the dollar ends up staying in Canberra. I agree that that is probably the way it should be. I wish we kept more here in Western Australia but I agree that I am an Australian and therefore this is a way to provide that flow of money to all Australians. Sometimes we get a bit greedy and think that we should keep more. What would happen if a massive oilfield was suddenly found in Tasmania? We would all suddenly want to be Tasmanians or say that we are all Australians and want the Tasmanians to share with us. Of course, it was not until the 1960s that Western Australia paid its way anyway. We were a mendicant state that until the 1960s did not pay its way as a part of the Commonwealth of Australia. Therefore, we must remember that as well. However, we must not forget that the fact remains that royalties belong to Western Australians and it is the right of the Western Australian government to impose those royalties. I congratulate the Minister for State Development for doing that. In his second reading speech the Minister for State Development talked about this money going to vital infrastructure. Please do not rebuild Subiaco Oval before we build Wiluna North Road. That road is vital—not so much for the Goldfields—and was promised when the Liberal government, I think it was, pulled up the railway line from Meekatharra to Wiluna 54 years ago. The government said, “Don’t worry about pulling up the railway line; we’re going to build a road next year.” It is 54 years later and we still do not have a road — Mr J.E. McGrath interjected. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: The member for South Perth can build his oval. By the way, the oval will be filled on only two days a year—the two derbies—now that the Eagles are going badly and the Dockers do not have enough members to fill it! The member for South Perth wants to build a new oval because the current one is full on two days a year. I want to see a new oval, too, like most football lovers and sport lovers do, but I say to the Premier, who is in the house now, that a road in the north is far more vital to state and national interests because it will save hundreds of millions of dollars in the next two or three decades. If we move all that tonnage from the eastern states and put it off at Kalgoorlie—we will build a transmodal shipping centre in Kalgoorlie—and take it straight up Goldfields Highway from Wiluna to Great Northern Highway and into the Pilbara to the gas projects, the savings will be astronomical. The couple of hundred million dollars it will take to build that road will be saved, I say, within a decade. That road is far more important than the oval. Once we have done that, members can have their oval and everything else that they want in Perth. They can put bitumen on top of bitumen again, as they usually do because everything else is so wonderful down here in Perth — Mr J.E. McGrath: You don’t have to come down here, you know, member for Kalgoorlie! Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I do because Parliament is here. I come down as late as I can and I get out as quickly as I can! However, I have to come down here. If we are going to use this money for infrastructure, that road is vital to not only the Western Australian interest but also the national interest because it cuts about 200 kilometres off the route from west Kalgoorlie to Perth and then up to, say, Newman, plus it will reduce the tonnage that currently comes in to Perth, and has to be transhipped on highways in and out of Perth along Leach Highway through South Perth and Como. All of a sudden, all those trucks that do not have to be in Perth would be able to go straight from Kalgoorlie to the north, but they will not be able to until that road is built. Therefore, I think that is vital infrastructure. I believe that it is gathering momentum and I look forward to the next state budget moving in that direction. Another matter that I urge the Minister for State Development to consider the next time he is negotiating with these companies is the inclusion of local government rates. I was part of the government that I thought had pulled that off. The previous government had a policy that if any state agreements were changed, local government rates would go on the table. I urge the Premier, the Minister for State Development, to do the same. I was, first of all, the Minister for Local Government and then the Minister for Resources, so I was intimately involved in some negotiations with the companies. There was concern that local government rates would apply to some of that big infrastructure in the iron ore industry and that the companies could be up for $40 million or $50 million—there was even talk of $80 million or $100 million—a year to the Shire of East Pilbara and so on. We got the Valuer-General’s office to get the companies to open their books on seven state agreements—a coal agreement, an alumina agreement, a gas agreement, a nickel agreement, two iron ore agreements and the diamond agreement in the Kimberley. The Valuer-General assessed the books to let the companies know what they would be up for if local government rates did apply, so there would not be any major surprises. I suppose that if the worst-case scenario occurred, and they were up for $80 million to be paid to a small council, we could then make some legislative changes to ensure that the companies were not screwed and that some commonsense

5082 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] prevailed. The only two companies that dragged their feet on that were Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton. I had been minister for a couple of months and I kept thinking that it was all progressing until I found out that BHP and Rio had not opened their books and were refusing to participate. The other five companies had. I called both companies on a Monday and said, “If your books aren’t here and your agreement isn’t here by the close of business Friday, we’re going to do it and when we do it, if suddenly you are paying the $80 million a year to Port Hedland or the East Pilbara shire, so be it!” We were only trying to protect the companies. By the close of business on that Friday they had both reluctantly agreed to participate, but they still do not pay local government rates. My argument with the senior executives of both companies was that they would give this money to local government like every other company does in Western Australia and, lo and behold, that money would be then spent in their towns to benefit their workers and their families. So what was the big deal about not having local government rates? The companies said, “We give the Newman shire a million dollars here and we give the Port Hedland town council a couple of million dollars here.” That is chickenfeed. They should be paying local government rates and it behoves the government to ensure at the next opportunity that they do it. The companies say that they have a state agreement, but I say that if they want to stick to the letter of the law of those state agreements, let us stick to them and go back and see what we, the community of Western Australia and the government, has paid out on hospitals, police stations, footpaths, roads and all those other services that under the state agreements, the companies were required to provide. They have not provided that in two decades. They literally use one part of the state agreement and stick to it and do not do anything on the other side. If companies do not want to pay for state agreements, we should send them a bill for what the taxpayers of Western Australia have paid as their part of the state agreement for the past 20 years. If companies do not want to pay local government rates, that is what we will do—we will send them a bill. I would say that the bill would amount to many hundreds of millions of dollars. The companies are getting away with that. I had another argument with senior executives; I will not mention their names. I kept on saying that they are going to spend this money in their towns where they may employ 85 per cent of the workforce and the other 15 per cent are probably contractors supplying their companies anyway. They were saying that it is not their company and they want to control their money more directly. The fact is that they are in those communities, which were run down in the seventies, eighties and nineties. The member for Gosnells said that they are doing it very easy these days and the money is flowing. In fairness, he is right—right now they are doing it very easy. But for 25 to 30 years it was not like the good days we are seeing now. When houses in mining company towns such as Newman were first built in the sixties, they were of a similar standard to the normal suburban house in Perth. They are far from that now. The mining company officials defended their position by saying that they spent a lot of money and these towns are really nice. I asked where they lived. They all live in Perth. They fly up north for one or two days and then come back to Perth. I said that their families are in Perth but they want their workers to live in these towns where the standard has dropped in the past 30 years. Local government normalisation is a small part of that. The next time these companies are at the negotiating table, I urge the Premier to put that in. There are mining companies in the member for Roe’s electorate—they used to be in my electorate for the previous eight years—such as Cliffs–Portman in Koolyanobbing, that pay the rates that these companies pay and they pay local government rates. It is not as though Rio and BHP are being asked to do something special that other iron ore producers in the state do not do. Everyone else does it except Rio and BHP. They should. What is happening here is a long time coming, more than a decade. It is good for Western Australia. I point out to the member for Gosnells that it flows on to the rest of Australia. It is good that the state government is imposing these royalties. It has been a long time coming. I hope that the next time the Premier has them at the table, he includes local government rates in those negotiations. MR P. PAPALIA (Warnbro) [7.43 pm]: I rise to speak on the Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010. At the risk of covering ground that just about every member who has spoken has already covered, I want to focus on some concerns I have on the two shadow portfolios I hold. I admire the Premier’s stamina and appreciate the fact that he is in the house tonight. It is a tiring job. I have always admired the people who fill the role of Premier. Mr C.J. Barnett: It’s only the first day of the session. Mr P. PAPALIA: I know. I am sure that the Premier was busy during the recess and he is now feeling very weary, particularly after all the callisthenics he was doing earlier today, captured in living colour on Channel Seven. Mr M. McGowan: It was almost a star jump. The Premier’s aged a bit since the star jump; he can’t quite get there any more. Mr P. PAPALIA: That is right. At least the viewers could not see his legs going. It is a good thing that the Premier is here to listen to these contributions.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5083

I am thankful that I am following the member for Kalgoorlie because at the end of his contribution he put forward the issue of local governments quite forcefully. He clearly articulated the argument for why we need to focus on rating of mining companies in this particular negotiation. An inconsistency has been identified by perhaps a reluctance or perhaps the government is negotiating to change the rules of rating. It appears as though that has not necessarily been considered at the outset; it is certainly not mentioned in the second reading speech. There is an inconsistency with how we as the Parliament or how the government is dealing with local governments at the moment. On Thursday last week the Minister for Local Government nipped down to the Western Australian Local Government Association’s annual conference early in the morning. I was going there to listen to him speak. When I got there, I was told that he had already been and made an announcement but he was coming back. I wondered what that announcement would be. I was told that it was an announcement about the state local government partnership agreement, except it is not called a partnership any more; it is a state local government agreement, a re-signing of the agreement. I thought that was interesting because I had been waiting for that. I got onto the website to see whether the minister had put out a media release. He had not, and he still has not. I wonder whether the reason he has not and the reason he nipped down to the conference in the morning without any great fanfare and just made the announcement to the local government councils that were at the conference that morning is that we are two years into this new government. There has been a consistent inquiry on behalf of the membership of the Western Australian Local Government Association as to its relationship with the state government, specifically the Premier, of what will be the agreement about meeting, how frequently it will occur and whether he will continue the groundbreaking agreement that was reached by the Gallop government originally and continued by the Carpenter government whereby there was an agreed method for meeting. It was formalised, minutes were taken and regular meetings were undertaken by either the Premier of the day or the minister in his stead. In light of the fact that we have now gone through 18 months of uncertainty as a result of the push for structural change in the local government sector, I felt that that refusal or that reluctance to engage in a new agreement and engage in a visual and open recognition of the relationship between state and local governments was a bit disappointing. I am glad that that has happened. There is an inconsistency there. At the same time as not putting out a media release about the two years down the track state local government agreement, the minister is putting out releases. He put out a release today on how the local government structural change process is playing out. Mr C.J. Barnett: What’s this got to do with iron ore royalties? Mr P. PAPALIA: I will tell the Premier. The minister trumpeted, amongst other things, four local governments—Ashburton, East Pilbara, Port Hedland and Roebourne—that are forming a regional collaborative group in the Pilbara. Mr I.C. Blayney: Good idea. Mr P. PAPALIA: That is true; it is a good idea. Those councils currently do not benefit from being able to rate the companies that operate in their areas in accordance with the argument articulated by the former minister responsible, the member for Kalgoorlie. The government is saying how wonderful it is that these four councils in particular are leading the way in forming a regional collaborative group. We are trumpeting the fact that they are doing that and that they are engaging with the state government in a positive fashion. We finally have a state local government agreement signed. We do not have in this amendment to this state agreement recognition that those councils do not get the opportunity to raise revenue through rating those companies that operate in their areas and therefore provide the infrastructure that is required to support the operations of those companies. I think there is a disconnect. On the one hand, the Minister for Local Government is trumpeting the fact that these four councils have been very positive and cooperative and are moving forward into the future, as the minister would like to see occur, and on the other hand, we are ignoring their requirements. It is a longstanding acknowledgement by the local government sector that this is a failing, a flaw in the system that should be rectified at the first opportunity. Again, there is another inconsistency. I know that the minister says it frequently when he is speaking to the local government sector. Through the systemic sustainability study that was undertaken by WALGA under the previous government, local government acknowledged that it needed to undertake reform. It always says that. But one of the things that were found by the systemic sustainability study was that these state agreements contain clauses that limit the valuation and rating of agreement land to unimproved value, and thereby effectively rip off the councils. One of the key findings of that systemic sustainability study, to which the minister refers frequently when talking to local governments, imploring them to adopt his structural change process, was that there was a need for change. One of the other things that study found was that there was a need for change to this sort of agreement and that these companies should be compelled to pay their way, provide the revenue stream to the regional councils and therefore enable them to provide for their citizens and provide infrastructure for the companies to be able to continue to operate. That is one of the things I wanted to raise. That is one of the shadow portfolios I wanted to focus on.

5084 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

The other one is corrective services. Clearly, as has been mentioned by other speakers tonight, there are people in the regions where these companies operate who are not receiving a fair share and who are not receiving a benefit as a result of that state agreement. Here is an opportunity. I am fearful that we may be witnessing a missed opportunity. It will be missed if we do not change the limits placed on the councils in rating the agreement land, but it will be further missed if we do not specify and dictate in very clear terms what we expect from these companies regarding local employment and local content. I suggest, because of the shadow portfolio that I hold, that there should be a real focus right down to specifically compelling those companies to get involved in trying to reduce the number of Aboriginal people who end up in the prison system by engaging in efforts to reduce that reoffending as they come out of the prison system. If members have not been to the Roebourne Regional Prison, they should go. We all know how starkly that stands, along with the town of Roebourne, in contrast with the surrounding area, the towns and the activity that is going on in that part of the world. I knowledge that there has been progress in the past couple of years regarding the number of Aboriginal people employed. However, I do not think that is good enough. We need to be quite specific about what we expect. We need to set targets for employment, but also set targets for engagement with authorities such as the Department of Corrective Services to ensure that these companies link up with that department, the state government authorities responsible such as the education department, the training department, local governments, the federal government, any non-government organisations and other businesses to ensure we have a joined-up response. I put the discussion paper on justice reinvestment out there because one of the things that it provides for is a framework to consider how we should go about trying to reduce reoffending. It calls for a joined-up response. In South Australia, a bloke there named Monsignor Cappo is the Commissioner for Social Inclusion for South Australia. He advises the South Australian government on the concept of social inclusion. He has garnered this concept from overseas. It has been utilised in a number of places in the United States. It refers to joined-up responses to this problem of achieving social inclusion. I have no doubt that there are lots of other different names for different processes that all seek to achieve the same thing, which is to ensure that instead of different levels of government, different agencies, different NGOs, different businesses and different communities all working at odds with each other, all the work is coordinated, and we all work with a combined approach that is developed as required to meet the needs of each specific community, because we cannot expect to roll out a blanket approach to achieve an outcome across such a diverse state as Western Australia. Even in the region that we are talking about in the North West, we have to get down to each specific community and look for a solution. I believe that this is an opportunity. There has been a move in some US states to adopt a program that calls for a minimum percentage of workers to be employed by each company. The companies sign up to it, participate in it, and undertake that they will meet that requirement of a percentage of overall employment. We can see how those sorts of initiatives need to be coordinated across the board—across all levels of government, all businesses, NGOs and communities. That is why we need a more consolidated approach to how we deal with reducing recidivism when people leave our prison system. This is an opportunity to link in with the real world right now while we are changing a state agreement that dictates how these companies can and cannot operate and what we will expect from them. I do not think it is satisfactory any more to have them just make their best endeavours; that is, have them set a target which sounds enticing at the start but which, because it is not rigidly adhered to, over time eventually dissipates into a very disappointing outcome. I am not blaming those companies. I do not think we have asked enough of them. We have not been specific enough, and we have not provided them with a framework within which they can work. That is why I again ask the government to consider justice reinvestment as a framework, apply it in that region, and link any requirements we are placing on the companies for local content, local employment and, specifically, engagement with the people who are in the custodial system to whatever we do in this amendment bill. We should take the opportunity. I believe we would find that the companies would be welcoming of it. I have not met any mining executives who have been negative about trying to employ more Aboriginal people and trying to get better outcomes. They all think positively in that regard. I believe that we, as the Parliament of Western Australia, have probably failed them, in that successive governments have not provided them with a framework within which they can work in an effective fashion so that we can overcome those barriers between federal, state and even local governments whereby everyone is working at odds with each other. We need to ensure that we try to target achieving a joined- up response to tackling the disadvantage. I am speaking specifically about the corrective services system in that area and trying to focus on those people who live in that area and end up in that prison and who then, sadly, go back into the community, do not change their lifestyle, fall back into the same behaviour and end up back in the prison system very quickly. I urge the Premier and the government to do whatever they can to use this as an opportunity, particularly in that field, but also very much in the local government sector. I ask that whatever they do, we do not fail again to take advantage of what is going to be an almost unique opportunity.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5085

MR I.C. BLAYNEY (Geraldton) [7.58 pm]: I will speak briefly on the Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010. Of course, I support the changes to the royalties. Recently, the Minister for State Development—the Premier—visited Geraldton to mark the reopening of the Koolanooka mine and the export of hematite out of Geraldton. It had quite a lot of significance for me, because I can remember, when I was a child of about five, that my mother drove me up there in the old Holden HR station wagon and we parked next to the train unloader, as we could in those days; people could just drive onto the wharf and watch a train from Koolanooka unload. It was quite interesting to stand there next to the train unloader the other day when a group of backbenchers were up in Geraldton with me and to see that nothing had changed. It is exactly as it was 40 years ago. It was also interesting to speak to Sinosteel and to find out that under the Koolanooka deposit that it is mining at the moment are another 350 to 400 million tonnes of magnetite. That is quite exciting, because it says to me that there is another potential magnetite mine in my area. If we go through them, we now have Gindalbie’s Karara mine, the first stage of which will ship eight million tonnes a year through Geraldton port. However, there is enough there for 30 million tonnes a year to come out for 30 years. Sinosteel will move from Koolanooka to the Weld Range, where it has enough to bring out 15 million tonnes of hematite for about 15 years, and then it will move on to another deposit it has at Robinson Range. It also has deposits at Jack Hills. Asia Iron has a quite exciting project in that it will build a 300- kilometre slurry pipeline, and eight million tonnes a year of that will be dedicated to Geraldton port for forever. Jack Hills has upgraded its deposits to three billion tonnes, which is a mixture of hematite and magnetite, and other companies, such as Golden West Resources, Cashmere Iron, and numerous others I have lost track of also have projects. It is interesting to consider this, because a lot of members do not realise that the first iron ore that came out of Australia when the bans were lifted came out of Geraldton. Those exports ceased in the 1970s when the Pilbara came on stream, but it is quite exciting for me to see the iron ore industry again contributing to the Mid West economy and starting to make a big impression. We have been talking about concessions, but nobody has questioned that these concessions were put in place to help the development of the Pilbara industry. I regard the government money that has been committed to Oakajee port as, in a way, a trade-off. We are not giving the mining companies a concession on the royalties they will pay, we are actually putting money in up- front, which gives those companies confidence to enter into big capital investments, because there is a lot more capital investment in magnetite than in hematite. We have been through a global financial crisis and yet none of those companies has questioned any of their plans; they are keener than ever to get on and build their projects. Of course, in the Mid West the new mines will be in addition to existing industries; we are not creating new towns, we are just adding another unit onto our existing economy. As these new projects take off, I am reminded of the development of the hematite mines in the Pilbara, which were followed by an almost explosion of the Japanese economy in the 1960s and 1970s, and as the magnetite mines are developed in my area, I think that will be followed by huge, vast, continuing growth in the Chinese economy. Most of the mines in my electorate either have a Chinese customer or are partially, or almost wholly, Chinese owned. They are already proving to be excellent corporate citizens in the region. The other point about Oakajee and its railway lines is that there is a large industrial estate next to it that is ready to go. That is another reason why it is very important for the government to be involved in that harbour, because reliable, efficient transport through that port will be critical for any industries that set up in that industrial estate. We already have a number of companies that have shown interest in setting up there. I cannot say that a new federal resources tax that takes $7 billion out of the Western Australian economy and gives us $2 million back is a good deal. I cannot say that a deal on goods and services tax that will result in us getting half of our GST funds back is a fair deal either. When applying extra royalties to mines we have to be very careful because mining, to a point, is a bit like my old industry—farming. In the good times people think the good times will never end; unfortunately they always do. I read about the central African country of Zambia, which is basically a copper mine with a country attached to it. When the copper mines were doing quite well, the government upped the royalties, but about 19 months later it had taken them back to where they were before because it had completely knocked the confidence out of the entire industry. That government understood that to ensure future investment, companies had to have confidence in the present day—one flows from the other. I would like to endorse the comments of the member for Kalgoorlie about the road from Wiluna to Meekatharra, although I understand the passion some people have for sports stadiums. I was talking about this road, which is 180 kilometres long, yesterday with someone from the Mid West Development Commission. My reading of it is that it would be better for that road to go most of the way to Meekatharra from Wiluna, and then to turn north, rather than just go directly — Mr J.J.M. Bowler: It goes to the turn-off to the Magellan lead mine, just past there. Mr I.C. BLAYNEY: We are going to have an argument about this, I think! It is a critical road. I have not actually driven it, but I have been told numerous times that it is in an absolutely dreadful state, it is a shocker, and it would be a good thing to seal that road.

5086 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

I will mention another road that I am slightly passionate about, which is the road to the Murchison shire. If the decision to seal roads goes on traffic flows and the like, this is one of those roads that will probably never be sealed, but they are endeavouring to seal it as much as they can. With the Square Kilometre Array project being about 80 kilometres east of the Murchison shire, it would be a very good thing if we could commit ourselves to seal that road as well. Mr V.A. Catania: There’s a great roadhouse there! Mr I.C. BLAYNEY: It is very good! Finally, I endorse, to whatever degree possible, making these companies pay local government rates. When we brought the state agreement act for Iluka into Parliament last year, at that point Iluka started paying rates to the City of Geraldton. I think that is a good thing. Iluka has always been a model corporate citizen in Geraldton, and it has employed a lot of people, has been very stable and contributes a lot to the community, but, as a ratepayer, I do not have a problem with Iluka also paying rates. I endorse whatever we can do to get rates back into local governments. The other thing I would like to endorse is the state government’s commitment, under royalties for regions, to develop the Pilbara Cities project. I think that is an absolutely fantastic program and it should have been done 10 years or 20 years ago, but this government has done it, and it will make a difference in those areas. MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta) [8.07 pm]: I rise to speak in support of the Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010. I am full of goodwill tonight and very positive, and I want to congratulate the Premier and Minister for State Development for pulling off this deal. I do that knowing that often the Premier has said things that sometimes have a few stings in the tail, and we know that there are other matters consequent to this that he has not been able to lay out for us. Full of that goodwill, I accept that that is because they are negotiations that the Premier wants to conclude and it would not help to reveal them, and that he is not hiding something that might be negative and a problem. I will be very positive and accepting of the real achievement, and just deal with that and put aside the fact that there are other matters that will come to this place in the future. Hopefully, they will also be positive and not be negative, with this positive being used as the sales pitch for that negative. As the Premier stated in the second reading speech, the removal of these concessional royalties has been the goal of successive governments since 1996, and it was certainly something that was pursued by the Gallop and Carpenter governments. The situation, which has already been mentioned and on which I will comment very briefly, was that when iron ore mining was established in the Pilbara in the 1960s, it really was a whole new industry and a fair level of risk was associated with large capital investment made at that time. That big investment was needed to build the towns, railways, ports and all the rest. There was recognition that the international market for iron ore at that time did not place the same value on iron ore fines as on the lump ore. Therefore, a concession was written into the agreement acts, which this bill amends, to allow a concession royalty rate for fines of 3.75 per cent, whereas the mining regulations in general required a royalty rate of 5.625 per cent, or five per cent for beneficiated ores that had obviously been processed or enriched in some way. This means that the companies that were able to get the concession on the iron ore fines under the agreement acts are now paying, from 1 July, the standard royalty rate of 5.625 per cent. That certainly should have happened, and is something this Premier, as Minister for State Development, brought to fruition. I congratulate him for that. As I indicated, in the early days of the industry, the value of iron ore fines in the international marketplace was less than the value of lump ore, and this was recognised in the lower rate. However, with the huge growth in the iron ore industry, fines have really become the standard product. Reflecting on the figures the Premier gave, fines made up 40 to 45 per cent of the iron ore export in the 1960s. That figure rose to over 55 per cent in the 1980s and now it is somewhere around 70 per cent. With the continued quite massive expansion of this industry, it is anticipated that the percentage of fines will grow even further. Now that there is not so much discrimination in price in the marketplace—it is still there but it is not so pronounced—it makes sense that the same rate of royalties should apply. As a member said in an earlier contribution to the debate, new iron ore companies such as Fortescue Metals Group Ltd do not receive the concession. There is an issue of equity in the marketplace. New companies that are making large capital investments and trying to establish a new market niche should not have to pay a higher royalty rate than that of the well established companies with which they have to compete. This equity issue highlights why it makes good sense to remove the concessional royalty rate for iron ore fines. I have not heard any debate about the federal tax that will apply to iron ore. This issue has become so political that people have been grandstanding and making wild statements instead of dealing with the real issues. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I am happy to take an interjection, but I will just make this point. There is an issue of balance. We need to make sure that there is a good level of profitability for the companies and that we do not create situations of sovereign risk. However, we also need to recognise that the huge profitability of and growth in this industry is really selling the people of this state short. We really should be able to get a better return from this industry, because it is no longer a fledgling industry; it is a very vibrant, profitable industry that uses this

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5087 state’s resources. There is the balance between recognising and respecting the rights of companies that have made massive investments, while recognising that the whole market has changed and that the people of this state deserve a better return on their resource. The Premier has recognised that in part through this bill and the increase to royalties by getting rid of the concession. There are potential issues of sovereign risk, but he has gotten around those, which is good. The fundamental issue that has to be addressed, and to which there is no simple answer, is that of how to find a better balance between the birthright of the people of Western Australia— that is, the resource—while respecting and recognising the very real interests of the mining companies and their right to make a good profit. We need to find the balance between the two. I do not think anyone, other than a few billionaires, would think that the current situation is a fair and equitable balance. Most people would agree that a better share of that asset, which is owned by the people of Western Australia, should flow to the people of Western Australia. That is the critical issue, but how to achieve it is not easy. I will go on to say a few things about that. We also have to recognise that while the iron ore industry is currently making mega profits, that has not always been the case and I do not assume that it will always be the case in the future. Our resources and the international marketplace will, over time, go on rollercoaster rides. There will be good times when the product is in high demand. All the forecasters are telling us that the demand from China and India will last for a few years. We hope they are right, because this state is a great beneficiary of that, but I do not think anyone out there thinks it will go on forever. As new supplies are found and as the world economy goes up and down there will be times when the iron ore industry in this state will find that the cost of production will move closer to the price it gets for its product in the marketplace. It will then shift its corporate structure and style of operation to cut costs, as it did just a few years ago, because the industry will be much more competitive and there will be much smaller profit margins. However, that is not the situation now. If we seek to provide a greater share of the profits to the people of Western Australia by way of royalties, that mechanism will bring with it a whole lot of problems. It is a very blunt instrument. It is hard to charge different royalties for different companies based on their profitability. In fact, I do not think it can be done. It might be able to be done in some small ways with different minerals, but even that is fraught with difficulties. It will be very difficult to say that some minerals have a much higher rate of return and therefore a different royalty rate should apply. I personally do not think that road is worth travelling along, but some people might come up with a scheme to try to deal with that. Another fundamental problem with trying to get a greater return on royalties for the people of this state is that some companies will be very profitable while other mining operations will be more marginal, yet the same royalty rate will apply. The benefits of the mining industry to Western Australia do not come primarily from royalties; they come in the form of the jobs, wealth and knowledge the industry creates, and the industries that flow from it. A marginal mining operation may return almost as much to Western Australia as a very profitable mining operation, because the profitable mining operations are often not owned by Western Australians and the profits do not stay here. What stays here is the payroll tax, the money that is paid in servicing the mine and all the support industries that make the mine work. That is the benefit to Western Australia. The profits, in most cases, do not come to Western Australia—they go to Melbourne, Sydney, New York, London or wherever. That is part of the international marketplace, and I do not decry that. However, we need to be honest about where the benefits are to Western Australia. I return to why increasing royalties to give a better share to Western Australians will not work, because it will knock over a number of those marginal mining operations that are good for the state. Even though their profitability is small, they create jobs and industry and they drive the Western Australian economy. Does the Premier disagree? Mr C.J. Barnett: Give me an example of where royalties has prevented a mining operation from going ahead. I can’t think of one in 20 years around this industry. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Premier was not listening. I said that if the royalty rate were increased, it would impact on marginal operations and not on profitable ones. The Premier came in halfway through what I was saying. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is the same point. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Does the Premier not agree with that? If the royalty rate were doubled to 10 per cent or so, would that not affect any mining operations? Mr C.J. Barnett: If you trebled royalties. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I am not talking about iron ore. I am talking about all minerals. Mr C.J. Barnett: I am just saying that royalties are a relatively minor operational expense. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: In general, but they will impact in certain areas. For instance, when the market fell away in the diamond industry, there was a question of whether Rio Tinto would invest $1 billion or so to go underground. The company came to the then government about royalties because it saw them as a cost factor. Most ministers will do what they can to help mining operations get off the ground, as the Premier did when he

5088 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] was previously minister, because they really benefit this state. The point I was making while the Premier was outside the chamber is that I think the people of Western Australia deserve a better share, but the difficulty if we seek to get that through royalties is that the impact will not fall equally on every mine. Some mines are very profitable and it is not a problem. As the Premier said, it is insignificant to them. But there will be some, perhaps a very small number of mines, for which that increase in royalties will be a factor that might mean they do not proceed. I do not want that to happen. I want every mine that can produce wealth and produce jobs to have an opportunity of being developed. [Member’s time extended.] Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The point I am coming to is the history of this legislation and the real impact of this royalty increase on this state and the effect the new federal mining tax may or may not have on it. As I indicated, and as the Premier has recognised, this has been going on for some time. Alan Carpenter was able to do a deal that enabled the concession to be done away with but he could apply it only to new mines because of the sovereign risk. Mr C.J. Barnett: Alan Carpenter did some good work; I am not denying that. But if there was a deal, I thought it would have been put in place. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: It was in the budget papers. Mr C.J. Barnett: I listened to all that you talked about. When I came into government I asked if there was a signed deal, but there wasn’t. No-one could produce it for me. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: It was in the budget papers, but the Premier was able to take it a lot further because Rio and BHP Billiton were seeking to form a joint venture, and they needed government approval to make it work. This new Premier coming in had a bargaining chip that Premier Carpenter did not have. This Premier used it effectively, and I congratulated him for it. Using that bargaining chip the Premier was able to have the concession done away with on all iron ore fines mining not just new mines. That makes a big difference to the amount of money coming through. In addition, he was able to get the $350 million one-off payment. That too was very much to our benefit, and I congratulate him on it. However, how does that benefit Western Australia? It does benefit Western Australia. But we must recognise that WA is part of the federation. In this year’s budget the biggest contributing component to revenue for 2010– 11 for the state of Western Australia is commonwealth grants of 41 per cent or $9.4 billion. The next biggest contributor is taxation, 29 per cent or $6.6 billion. Royalty income is 14 per cent or $3.3 billion. The commonwealth grants system, which works to a very complex formula, redistributes the commonwealth funds between the states on the basis of their ability to earn their own revenue. It used to be calculated on a five-yearly cycle. But I understand that this government suggested it would be in WA’s interest for it to be a three-yearly cycle. When this state earns extra revenue through royalties, as this bill will allow, in three or four years’ time, after three years’ worth of royalties have been calculated, the commonwealth will reduce its contribution to WA because we have raised more money. This is shown in the budget papers based on the government projections when it set this budget. Clearly, volumes will change and international pricing will change. That will move around, but these figures are indicative of what happens. Across the forward estimates, GST revenue for the current year, 2010–11, is $3.4 billion; in four years, in 2013–14, it will be down to $3.27 billion—it is dropping. It is anticipated that total collections across Australia will go up, but we will get a lesser share. Other commonwealth grants range from $4.8 billion in the current year down to $4.5 billion. We are getting less of a bigger cake. Mr C.J. Barnett: That shows you why we need a change of government in Canberra, doesn’t it? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Premier for his interjection. They are the sorts of mistruths that this Premier spreads. We are getting done over by Canberra because this Premier, as Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party in the Court government, signed up for the GST. I debated in this place day after day what a bad deal it was for this state. The GST screwed WA and Premier Barnett signed up to it. He made sure that WA got done, as we saw last week when he threw WA’s money down the drain with a High Court challenge. Prior to 2000, when he was in the Court government, he wanted to do a deal to support the Howard government and he sold out this state. This Premier, with Richard Court, sold out this state. The Labor Party then in opposition moved motion after motion in this place to say, “This is a deal that does WA down.” This Premier voted for it. He made sure that when we agreed to the GST, because we represented only 10 per cent of the vote, we would get done over like a dinner, and that is happening. It is no good for this state and we opposed it. We opposed it when members opposite agreed to the GST. We still oppose that dud deal that Colin Barnett did as the then Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party. We need to make sure we look after this state. The difference between Labor and Liberal governments is that we look after this state’s interest whether we are in opposition or in government. Whether the party in Canberra is Labor or Liberal, we have stood up for this state. But not the Liberals; they did deals to look after their mates in Canberra; they do not look after WA. That is the problem we have here. We see it time after time.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5089

We need to understand that, despite the Premier’s misleading statements, which he makes time after time, we are caught in a very difficult situation. It requires the agreement of the commonwealth and the other states to change the commonwealth grants or the GST arrangement. Do members opposite really think the other states will give up receiving Western Australian money and give it back to us? We are caught, because the Court–Barnett government sold us down the drain. That is our problem. It is not a matter of whether Labor or Liberal is in Canberra; the federal government has to get the other states to agree to any change. Regardless of what political complexion they are, does the Premier really think South Australia, Victoria, New South Wales or Queensland will give money back to WA because we deserve it? Mr C.J. Barnett: Yes. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: We do. The Premier said yes. He actually thinks that the other states will put our interest before their own. That is cuckoo land stuff. It reflects why he cannot run a budget; why he is running such a feeble government and hitting the pockets of ordinary working pensioners. He cannot manage the budget or the financial affairs of this state. The people of this state are paying for it; they are shivering at night because they cannot afford to turn on their heaters or have hot showers. They are eating dog food because we have a Premier who cannot manage the finances of this state. It has always been a problem, but the facts are that it has been made far worse. When Bob Hawke was the Prime Minister — Several members interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mrs L.M. Harvey): Order! Members should stop their conversations across the chamber. I have given the call to the member for Balcatta. Mr P.B. Watson interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Albany! Mr J.C. KOBELKE: During the Hawke government, Prime Minister Hawke set about trying to deal with the problem between the states and what was called the vertical financial imbalance. The problem was that it got mixed up in internal Labor Party politics. Keating used that as one of the issues to undermine Hawke, and Keating became Prime Minister, so it went out the window. Who knows when the next opportunity will enable a better balance to be achieved between commonwealth and state financial relations? If the Premier thinks the other states will give us money for nothing, he is in cloud-cuckoo land. We are being screwed by the Court– Barnett government arrangements with the Howard government. Now, it does not matter who is in politics, it will be very difficult to undo and we are suffering because of it. The measures in this bill amount to almost $1.2 billion over the forward estimates, plus the $350 million up front, which I assume will not be factored into the grants commission figures, but the $1.2 billion will be. That is not necessarily even, but for the sake of the argument, hypothetically, that will spread at $300 million a year, and in four years we will be left with about $30 million of the $300 million extra we get this year. We end up with about 10 per cent. While we get that money from the royalties, there is a commensurate reduction in the commonwealth funding to us. The net result is that of the $300 million, as an indicative figure, we will get $30 million or so left over as a net increase. The situation again points out that royalties are not the instrument by which the people of Western Australia can get a fair share of the wealth that is generated from our mining industry. That is where the federal government’s Henry tax review came in. I am not going into all the detail, and, honestly, I am not across it, but the proposal was that we have a profits tax on the mining companies so that those who are making big profits will pay a bigger share and those who are marginal do not have an increased tax hit at all; we then use the extra money that is collected to pay back the royalties. In that way it removes the disincentive that it might have had on a very small number of mines, and more mines will go ahead. We will have more mining because the federal government will take it as a tax on the more profitable companies. In theory, that is good. The problem is that it further removes from WA control of our assets. But when we look at the reality, the Court–Barnett government gave those up anyway! After four years, Western Australia is left with roughly only 10 per cent of what it collects in extra revenue; it is missing out anyway! The political reality that I referred to earlier is how we make sure we have a system that supports and encourages mining and makes it profitable but returns a better share for the people of the state. The Premier gave us these glib political answers and half-truths that misled people, but if he were interested in the people of Western Australia and in benefiting them, it is a problem worth solving. The Premier should be able to come up with some means by which the people of Western Australia get a better share. Given the limitations on royalties, any realistic assessment says that a commonwealth tax properly set and with a commitment back to WA is most probably the way to go. Mr C.J. Barnett: So you support it? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: It is fraught with difficulties.

5090 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr C.J. Barnett: You are supporting, basically, the commonwealth takeover of our natural resources, because that is what it is all about. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That proves what I said: the Premier’s glib half-truths do him a disservice. The Premier does not want to deal with the issue. The Premier does not want to make sure that, rather than the money going into the pockets of billionaires and shareholders in London and New York, the people of Western Australia get a better share, so that he does not have to slug them for electricity and water and hit them so that pensioners cannot afford to live a decent life. That is what the Premier is offering those people, because he does not have the foresight and the ability to deal with this difficult issue. The Premier pulled off a nice little coup with this because he had Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton over a barrel, but the issue is bigger than that; the issue is about making sure that the people of Western Australia get a better share of Western Australia’s resources while we are in boom times. Those boom times may last for a while, but they will not last forever, so we should be getting a better percentage now. If the Premier can do a deal with the commonwealth that gives the greatest possible certainty to the state’s interest, he should do it. It is a slippery slope, because it does not matter whether it is a Liberal or Labor government in Canberra, it will not look primarily to WA’s interests. That is the problem. We are only 10 per cent of the nation in terms of voting power. We might produce nearly 40 per cent of the exports, but at the end of the day the voting power in Canberra and the other states leaves us the loser. The Premier made sure Western Australia was the loser when he was in the Court government. The Premier now has the opportunity to try to rescue something of it—as difficult as it will be. I will give the Premier an example of where it did happen. It was back in the 1980s with the gas pipeline from the north, which was a great venture, now producing huge results. If the then Premier, Sir Charles Court, had not done that deal, we would not have had the North West Shelf gas, and the development we now see might not have happened until 20 or 30 years later than was the case. Premier Court did a great deal to get things going. The problem was that the deal committed the state to paying money it did not have. People have probably forgotten. We were paying the company money to put gas back in the ground. People have forgotten that! The state of Western Australia was paying companies to put gas back underground. If that had continued, the state would have gone bankrupt. What happened was that Premier Burke and Prime Minister Hawke did a deal so that a part of the huge value that was coming to the commonwealth was paid back to this state. We are still getting that special revenue today. That bailed us out. The point that the Premier should be driving home with the Prime Minister—whoever it is—is that it is in the interests of Australia to strengthen Western Australia and that to do a deal that gives a real and better share of the wealth created here is not only in our interests, but also in the national interest. I think that the Premier has said things to that effect, but if he does not sit down and talk turkey and do a deal, it does not go anywhere. The deal that the Premier can potentially do relates to the Gillard government’s resource tax and ensuring that a guaranteed percentage comes to Western Australia. The Gillard government is offering it, but if another government gets into Canberra, it can take it away. The Premier needs to lock down a deal, because the Gillard deal is a good one for Western Australia. Can I ask the member for Geraldton to explain his suggestion that that tax is taking money from Western Australia? How does it do that? Mr I.C. Blayney: It is an outflow. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: No, it is a tax on profits. The profits are paid to Sydney, Melbourne, New York, London and Paris. That is where most of the profits go, so we will get money back from them, not from WA. If the government designed the tax so that it was a really destructive tax, then, yes, it would affect WA; but when it is a tax based only on profits over $50 million a year, that will not hurt WA. It is absolute nonsense to say that it will take money out of Western Australia. It will take money from the overseas shareholders and bring it back to Western Australia in capital grants. The problem is that while I have confidence that the Gillard government will provide those capital grants, I do not have confidence that a future government will do so. This state government needs to ensure that it ties down a deal to protect the interests of Western Australia. The problem we have is that this Premier has a track record. In this house, we pointed out many times that the GST was going to be a huge loss for Western Australia; however, this Premier, as deputy leader of the Court government, signed up for it. In that way, the now Premier left Western Australia as the loser, and it is costing us very dearly now because of the action that he and Premier Richard Court took. Hopefully, the Premier can see the error of his ways and finally fight for Western Australia and do a deal with the commonwealth government— whichever party it may be—to ensure that we get a guaranteed better percentage of the royalties in our state, because under the GST we get that money and four years later 90 per cent of it is gone. MR W.J. JOHNSTON (Cannington) [8.37 pm]: I also congratulate the Minister for State Development, the Premier, on finalising the deal so that after many years we have an increase in the royalty rates. I must say that I was very excited earlier this year when I heard the Premier talking about royalty rates in the chamber. On 25 February 2010, the Premier said —

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5091

The mining companies are aware of it, — That is in respect of increasing royalty rates — and some of them have expressed their views. I have to say that a few people who work around the mining industry came up to me over summer and said, “By the way, Colin, the mining companies are getting away with murder; they’re not paying enough.” A number of people working in the mining industry have said that. I must say that I agree with the Premier. I think that what he said is right, and there needs to be an increase in the share of the resources of this country that are kept by the people of this country. A discussion took place when my friend the member for Balcatta was speaking. If we look at Rio Tinto as an example, 42 per cent of its shareholders live in the United Kingdom, 18 per cent in the United States of America, 16 per cent in Australia, 14 per cent in Asia and 10 per cent in continental Europe. It is a clear demonstration of what is a great thing about the world economy now, and that is its internationalisation. That is something that I support very strongly. Australia is enriched because we are an open global country. However, the facts remain that the profits of Rio Tinto do not come to Perth; they go around the world. That is not a bad thing; it is simply a statement of fact. Therefore, it is no surprise that Rio Tinto has agreed to the federal government’s minerals resource rent tax because it understands that it is appropriate that Australia shares in the profits that Rio makes and returns more resources to the people of Australia. There are differing estimates, but 24 billion tonnes is, as I understand it, the easily recoverable quantity of iron ore in the Pilbara. I understand that the inferred total iron ore in Australia—the lower grades and all those different things—is about 158 billion tonnes. Let us just think about that 24 billion tonnes for a minute. About 23 million to 50 million tonnes a year is now being extracted from these mines in the Pilbara. That means we have basically 30 to 50 years of this resource, because the companies are of course increasing production. Mr C.J. Barnett: If you go to a lower grade, you probably have several thousands of years — Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: Yes, we probably have hundreds of years after that. Mr C.J. Barnett: It used to be 30 000 years. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: Hundreds of years most probably, Premier, when we think about the increase in production. However, the point I am getting to is that my 18-year-old daughter, who is doing a geology degree right now, will see these easily recoverable reserves gone in her lifetime. The resources will be used. I think it is great that the Premier has increased the royalty rates on that production because it needs to be done. These companies, as the Premier said, have been getting away with murder, and we need to deal with that. I also encourage the Premier to think about a few other things. We now have what has become only a political slogan but may have been able to be created as a genuine policy in royalties for regions. I encourage the Premier to start thinking about royalties for our future generations. It is not right that we use 100 per cent of the royalty income that we get from a non-renewable resource to operate the functions of government on an annual basis. That means that 100 per cent of a non-renewable resource every year is being used to fund the operations of this state each year. What are we leaving for the future? The former government ran large budget surpluses, which was building for the future. For example, the Mandurah train line was delivered without any debt. That is one way of investing in the future, but there might be other ways. I draw the minister’s attention to Norway, which has built up a very large fund that is now delivering enormous annual income because it has converted royalties from its oil and gas reserves into an asset that continues to produce and will continue to produce into the future. We cannot continue to allow future generations of Western Australia to be mortgaged to the vagaries of future ore prices. We cannot let future generations be mortgaged to the potential elimination of easily recoverable iron ore resources. That is not sensible. We need to think more broadly than the old-fashioned approach that we have taken to the resource industry in this state. We need to start thinking about how we can actually capture that value for not only today but also the future. The reason we had these concessional rates in the 1960s was that there was a dream of downstream processing. That dream has proved illusory and there is a range of reasons for that, not the least being energy prices. We might think about that issue. There has also been globalisation. No company will build a steelworks in Western Australia and pay people Australian wages—decent fair-dinkum wages—when it can go to somewhere else in the world and pay lower wages for the same work. Given that the cost of shipping ore around the world is so low now because of the efficiency in bulk commodity transportation—the reason that we can have such a huge volume of mineral resources being shipped from all sorts of countries to all sorts of end consumers constantly— the idea that we have some magic bullet to create some downstream processing in this state, such as a steel mill, is impractical to achieve in the short term. Therefore, we need to think more broadly about how we can capture that value.

5092 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

These large companies, such as Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton, that are exploiting our resources are not based in this state. The serious decision-making in those companies is done elsewhere in the world. I know that the minister, like me, knows many of the executives of these companies and talks to them. When they need to make investment decisions, they need to refer to their headquarters—BHP Billiton to Melbourne and Rio Tinto to the United Kingdom. That is where the brainwork is done for those companies. If we could find ways to capture more of that brainwork in Western Australia, it would be a good thing and it would be a way of improving the benefits that we get from the exploitation of our mineral resources. The member for Balcatta made the point in his own contribution a moment ago that these are decisions and these are benefits that flow away from us. The profits do not come back to Western Australia, apart from the small number of shareholders who are here in Western Australia. It is a small number compared with the total number of shareholders that each of those massive global companies have. Therefore, this is the opportunity we have through the minister’s work as Premier of this state. If we can do better than we have been doing and have a bit of vision and thought about the future of the state, not just how we look today, that would be a great thing. It is interesting that there is always a debate about the GST deal that was done when the Liberal Party was last in power and that we were dudded by the GST deal. It is interesting when we refer to page 70 of this year’s budget paper, Economic and Fiscal Outlook, and the graph that Treasury has kindly provided of the difference from population share of funding that is coming to this state. Members can see that basically up until the GST deal was done, we got a higher revenue share than our population share. In fact, at the start of that chart, the share was more than 1.2; in other words, we had 20 per cent more revenue from the commonwealth coming to us than our population share. Since the GST deal, there have been only two years when we got greater than our population share of revenue. Of course, the deal that the government did now sees those revenues collapse to an alarming extent, whereby there is a prediction of only 70 per cent—0.7 of the chart—share of GST funding compared with population. That was a dud deal so if we could do something about renegotiating that, all the better. That would require a good relationship with the commonwealth government, a realistic examination of what we are doing in this state and a proper understanding of the appropriate way that states share the god-given resources that we all have in each of the different states, just as it would not be right for people in other states to have said that was not reasonable, for the 90 years until 2000 when we were a mendicant state, for WA to be funded. We are an important part of the commonwealth and there have been investments, such as in Garden Island by the Whitlam Labor government and the decision by the Hawke government to move elements of the fleet to Western Australia, from the commonwealth that we as a state benefited from. Equally, we need to make our own contribution to the commonwealth. It will be interesting to see the various elements of the deal that the Minister for State Development has made. I am not trying to put words in the minister’s mouth but I understand that what he was saying is that this is the first element of an agreement that he believes will occur. We just hope, as the member for Rockingham said, that the other elements of the deal are not to the disadvantage of Western Australians. It will be interesting to see what happens with the various downstream processing obligations that are put into these agreements. What obligations are being set aside, implemented or delayed for a future date? The other thing we need to think about is the best method of extracting this value. We are removing the concession that was given in the 1960s when there was a plan for the mineral processing industry. That plan never came off. Now that we have reached 2010 and we are looking to the future, what is the best method to capture that value for the future? I note that in its submission to the Henry tax review, the Minerals Council of Australia urged a profits-based resources tax or rental arrangement on future mineral deposits. I note that the Northern Territory already has a profits-based tax. I know that the commonwealth is looking at its profits-based tax. I wonder whether we serve the future generations of this state better by looking for a more flexible approach to royalties. I will explain exactly what I am getting at. For example, we could have a mine that is operating and the value of its resource is $100, a nice round figure, and it is spending $50 on expenses and costs of operating the mine. If the government is charging it $10 for the resource that it is using, it has a profit of $40. Suddenly the price of the product doubles. Its profit does not go from $40 to $80; it goes from $40 to $130. That is not right. It is not right that it is suddenly getting this huge windfall that is not being reflected in the benefit paid to this state. The government is only charging it a percentage of the value of the product and its profit is not dependent — Mr C.J. Barnett: Plus company tax. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: Company tax goes to the commonwealth. We know that. The point I am making is that we are missing out, my children are missing out and the children in 50 years will be missing out. We have had this 1960s approach to the resource industry and we all know it did not work. These mineral processing ideas never worked out. I credit former Premier Sir Charles Court for his vision. He did deliver. He delivered a large minerals industry in this state. He was part of the process that delivered the North West Shelf joint venture. There is no question about that. He delivered the pipeline from the Pilbara to Perth. He did not deliver what he wanted to deliver; that is, these steel mills and minerals processing—that additional value going down the value chain. That is why there was a low rate of royalties in this state. This is a great step.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5093

We heard from the member for Kalgoorlie and others about the need to have these large companies pay rates to local councils, which is an important issue. The other thing about that is that in the 1960s these companies built the towns themselves. They had a resident workforce. They were making a direct contribution to the situation and life of the people in those areas of the state. Now they have fly in, fly out workers. I was very interested to see—I know it is in the gas industry—Don Voelte saying about the James Price Point proposal that he intended to have 100 per cent of his workforce fly in and fly out. There are not the same drivers now in the resource industry for growing these northern cities as there were in the 1960s where there was a resident workforce. We need to think about how we will capture that additional benefit to this state. With my Labor colleagues, I happily say that we will support these increased royalties on these companies to overcome the 1960s approach to the royalties arrangements. It is now time for us to start having a genuine debate about how we can capture more of the value that these companies are taking out of the ground in this state because we are not currently capturing enough of that value. We are allowing too much of that value to flow. I do not have a problem with foreign investment. This is not a xenophobic rant or anything like that. I am very happy for Chinese, Japanese, English or American investment in Western Australia because foreign investment benefits not only the source of the investment but also the country that receives the investment. That is not an argument. This is an argument about how we capture more value and more future opportunities from the resources that we have in this state. DR M.D. NAHAN (Riverton) [8.55 pm]: I would like to make a few comments on the Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 and refer to some of the comments made on this bill today. First, as have most members, I congratulate the Premier and Minister for State Development for negotiating this. I remember maybe a year ago when the other side was lambasting him for not following through on the so-called Carpenter initiative. Quite clearly, there was a doubt about the initiative and whether it was formalised. More importantly, through his perseverance and by using the situation as it unfolded, the state got substantially more money both from the lump sum and through ongoing royalty payments. The shift to normalising the tax on royalties has been longstanding. We even discussed it when I was in the former department of resources development in the eighties. It was a longstanding initiative and to be supported. I would like to make some comments on an assortment of issues that were raised today. It is quite clear that the Henry tax review and the subsequent mineral tax, super tax marks I and II, have raised an important issue in Western Australia and one that is not new; that is, does the state get a fair share from its assets—the iron ore and other minerals—that it owns? The starting point, which was raised by the member for Kalgoorlie, is that the royalties are a payment, not a tax, for access to minerals that are owned by the states. They are a state right under the Australian Constitution. Any effort or action, whether it is no action or action or support that allows the commonwealth to come and take over those minerals, is a serious issue. It does address the issue of whether we are getting a fair share and how. The member for Balcatta made a very important point. Like me, he has been around for a while. We can often remember when the value of iron ore or the mineral industry went up and up. When I became involved in the mining sector in the late 1970s, the gold sector was about ready to close. Mt Charlotte goldmine was about to close but somebody gave it a bunch of money and it stayed up. When I first came in, I remember helping to renegotiate the North West Shelf contract when the take-or-pay option was almost bankrupting the state. Then again in the 1990s, iron ore was not profitable at all. In the early part of the 2000s, the gas price was $US11 to $US12 a barrel and the North West Shelf was not going to expand. We look forward and we see a booming China and India, where there are great prospects and the prices are high. We should not rely on it. The member for Balcatta also confused a couple of things. The royalties that we levy now are largely ad valorem royalties; they are added on the value of the tax. Royalties can take many shapes. When I first came into the bureaucracy, my task was to look at a profit-based royalty under the Burke government. We spent two years looking at that. At that time the issue was whether we were getting a fair share—in other words, revisiting an old issue. Should we consider putting a profit-based tax or royalty — Mr J.C. Kobelke: Did you at the time believe that was constitutionally possible? Dr M.D. NAHAN: No. The state was to levy it. Mr J.C. Kobelke: That is what I am asking. Is it constitutionally possible for the state to levy a profit-based royalty? Dr M.D. NAHAN: Absolutely. The question is: can the commonwealth constitutionally levy a profit-based royalty? That is what we will end up testing in the future if Gillard wins the election in a couple of weeks. The member for Balcatta asked whether we should use the ad valorem rates to grab a larger share of the pie. It would be highly destructive if we went up to 15 or 20 per cent of minerals, particularly on marginal projects in the Mid West that require a lot of capital expenditure and new investment. If members opposite strongly believe that the state is not getting its fair share of the royalties and that we have to be careful about volatility and profits, they

5094 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] should revisit what the Burke government visited back in the 1980s, which was a profit-based royalty proposal. The alternative is the commonwealth proposal. The commonwealth’s super tax mark I was one of the sloppiest and most potentially destructive pieces of public policy that I have ever seen. As members know, the commonwealth budget reflected that the super tax would raise about $12.5 billion. However, there was a leak that the super tax was going to raise double that. The result would have been $24 billion and high levels of uncertainty. It would have been highly destructive. The Gillard government renegotiated the super tax. It is my view that the new tax will not result in any revenue from Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton for five to 10 years. The way that the tax is structured and the way that it was negotiated by Rio and BHP means that they will have plenty of deductions. They will be allowed to fully deduct all their assets at market prices before they pay any royalties. They will not pay any tax for five to 10 years and the totality of the profit-based royalty will be levied on new marginal projects, including Fortescue. That process is highly discriminatory and flawed. The question is whether Western Australia is being dudded. The member for Cannington asked whether we are being murdered by the mining firms. Again, we have to put in a regime that can sustain ups and downs in the sector. Even though Rio has made a large amount of money out of Hamersley over the years, up until the past four or five years one would have to say that we got a fair share, particularly given, as the member for Balcatta stated, it made other contributions to the state, such as employment, asset formation and other things. Will we get our fair share moving forward? Rio and BHP have publicly stated that most of the profit that they have earned from their iron ore resources over the past 20 years has been more than reinvested in new assets. It is true that they are multinational firms and that their profits go around the world. However, they have invested very heavily in Western Australia to the totality of the profits they have earned from their assets. They might not do that in the future, but indications are that they intend to do so. The profits from the mines owned by the majors have flowed back into Western Australia, probably in the most productive way, which are from new productive assets that employ people. As for the smaller companies, such as Fortescue and Atlas, they are largely local firms and their funding base comes from around the world. One of the issues that has been raised repeatedly in this debate is whether or not we should use the windfall of the China boom to set up a large sovereign fund. Alberta did it effectively from oil and gas in the 1970s. At the commonwealth level, Peter Costello set up two sovereign funds. One was for higher education and one was to fund the superannuation of public servants. Both of those funds have been largely raided and dissipated by the Rudd–Gillard government. One of the problems with sovereign funds is that they are not sovereign and they get raided by sovereigns. They simply do not work in most places. Norway is a strange place and its funds are different from ours. The members for Balcatta and Cannington also referred to the so-called dudding of Western Australia by the goods and services tax. We have not been dudded by that at all. The state of Western Australia has received more money because of the GST than it would have otherwise received. Members opposite are confusing two issues; that is, the GST and the Commonwealth Grants Commission process. The GST gives the states some kind of predictability and natural growth in their revenue flows and their general-purpose grants from the commonwealth. Before the GST, the commonwealth could cook up a sum of money that it would hand over to the states in general revenue. The states receive from the GST the totality of the GST; if it grows, the states get the totality of the growth. The commonwealth decided to allocate the GST through the grants commission process that has existed since the 1930s. The grants commission process is what has dudded Western Australia, not the goods and services tax. Members are confusing the two. That might be politically clever; but they are different issues. When the GST was first introduced, we received more than our population share. I think it was 11 or 12 per cent. It varied from time to time and it has gone down steadily since, aiming towards 5.5 per cent, which is shocking for the state. That is because under the Commonwealth Grants Commission process, which is largely a welfare organisation system, Western Australia has become richer. It receives more income and people are on higher wages. Further, our costs have gone down, largely because more people live in Perth. Mr J.C. Kobelke: I think you are saying that it isn’t the executor who killed him; it was the rope. Dr M.D. NAHAN: That is the truth. Until recently, the grants commission process had bipartisan support in this house. For most of that time, we were what is called a claimant state; we received more than we paid. The member for Balcatta raised a good point when he asked where we go from here. He suggested that we accede the rights to our resources to the commonwealth in a commonwealth royalty and do a deal with the commonwealth to get the proceeds back. Mr J.C. Kobelke: On the basis that it will take it anyway. We can’t stop it. Dr M.D. NAHAN: That is a cop-out. First, we would be giving away a fundamental resource. We would be giving the commonwealth a fundamental asset of the state for no predictable gain. We could do a deal with the commonwealth and say that we want a share of that and it might agree to it during an election, particularly when it is not polling well in Western Australia. However, as the member indicated, we would not be able to trust the commonwealth government after a federal election. More importantly, the deal would come back with

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5095 commonwealth strings attached. The commonwealth would say that it would pay that money, but only if the state spent that money where the commonwealth wanted it to spend that money; moreover, the state would have to take money away from its higher priority projects to match the commonwealth. In other words, slowly the state would be tied to the cartwheels of the commonwealth. Not only would it control the money, but it would control policy and we might as well turn off the lights. Better yet, if members opposite believe strongly that we are not getting an adequate share and they recognise that the royalties would distort the small mines, the opposition should work up—it would keep it busy for a while—a profit-based royalty levied by the state. It would work. Some of it would get wound back in the grants commission process, but that is life. We have to fix the grants commission process, because that is what is dudding us. Mr J.C. Kobelke: How would you apply that to companies with which you have a state agreement act? Dr M.D. NAHAN: The Premier showed the way. We can renegotiate agreement acts. The Mining Act has determined the royalty rate for most of the recent agreement acts. If there is a profit-based royalty, there is no reason for discriminating against the petroleum industry and the iron ore industry and not the other very profitable sectors of the mining industry. That was Gillard’s furphy. This is a fundamental issue; it is about our heritage and our future. We have huge infrastructure demands to facilitate the development of the mineral sector, to make sure that the towns affected are redressed and to ensure that we achieve a better distribution of people around the state. However, despite our royalties, we are continually losing the financial capacity to carry that out. This is one of the fundamental, crucial issues we must address. But the mining tax put forward by Gillard will harm that, not help it. The member for Cannington raised a couple of other issues. I put it out there, I guess, for speculation and discussion. There are many other ways to add value to the mining sector. The member raised the point that we have tried with mineral processing, particularly specific to the fines. One of the ideas was that lower taxation of fines would lead to local steel mills, but it did not happen. We are getting quite a few steel mills as a result of the magnetite, so nothing is unpredictable. However, I would urge the Premier to undertake a few other lobbying issues. First, he should make sure that even more of Rio Tinto’s and BHP Billiton’s headquarters are located in Western Australia. There is no reason why—most of them are moving here naturally—BHP Billiton’s headquarters holus–bolus should not be in Western Australia rather than in Melbourne. Also, one of the major issues in debates going forward, particularly if Gillard wins in two weeks, God forbid, is that the mining sector will simply have to pick up more of its infrastructure costs. Therefore, one of the tasks is to ensure that before the Gillard super tax mark II is put in place, there is a deduction for all infrastructure investment by mines. If there is not, we should expect people opposite, particularly after the election, to rigorously support the formation of what is deductible and ensure that infrastructure on the mine site and in the towns and contributions to local government and social assets are fully deducted before the super tax is put in place; otherwise, we will have even less investment by the mining sector in Western Australia. I congratulate the Premier on his initiative. He has shown perseverance. He just fluffed off the flak from the people opposite about following Carpenter nowhere and started dealing in a minor, but substantial, way to ensure that we get adequate revenue from the mining sector and that we treat mines on a like-with-like basis. However, it is still out there, and I look forward to the people opposite not just succumbing to the need to support their friends in Canberra, but actually coming up with practical ideas. If they believe we are not getting a fair share, they should suggest how we can do so. In other words, let us get on with the big picture. MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe — Minister for State Development) [9.12 pm] — in reply: I thank the many members who have spoken for their contributions to this debate on the Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010, which ended up as a very wide-ranging discussion about the iron ore, the Pilbara, the roads, local government rating and the goods and services tax. It went on and on. However, there were some good comments and some good points were made. I will make a few brief comments in response. First, I will quickly restate, perhaps more clearly than I did before, some of the history of what has happened to the royalty rates applied to iron ore. The royalty is the price at which the state sells the mineral to the company. It is the selling price; it is not a tax as such. In the case of the iron ore industry, when it was developed in the 1960s during the Charles Court era, the royalties were set. There were two decisions, as was mentioned by members opposite. The first one was to give a concession below the standard Mining Act royalty in recognition of two factors. The first was that the companies themselves built the infrastructure—both the economic infrastructure and the social infrastructure, such as housing, roads, schools, hospitals and the like. So that was part recognition of that. It was also the case that at that stage the fines iron ore—the smaller particle material— had a limited market. It required extensive and expensive further processing by the steelmakers to use, and they simply did not want it. They preferred lump ore, and lump ore was readily available. Lump ore was the dominant supply from the industry. That made sense, and it helped to sponsor the growth of the iron ore industry in the Pilbara, which now supplies about a third of the world’s international seagoing trade in iron ore. It is a great industry; it is the largest industry basically in this state.

5096 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Time marched on. Fifty years have gone by, and the argument for those concessions has gone. Much of the infrastructure that was built—certainly the social infrastructure—is now aged, old-fashioned and in need of replacement, and progressively the townships and services are becoming normalised. Therefore, that argument is progressively disappearing. The other argument is also disappearing, because the fines iron ore, as members opposite observed, is now accounting for about 70 per cent of iron ore production. In fact, for many steel mills, fines iron ore is becoming the preferred product. Therefore, what was seen as the not preferred product is now the largest product, and in many cases the preferred product. In that scenario, and given the passage of time, it was sensible that the concession that was granted back in the 1960s and 1970s should be gotten rid of. Previous governments—the government of the 1990s and the previous Labor government—looked at this issue and had various discussions and made various attempts. I recognise and acknowledge that the previous Labor government did start a genuine debate with the major iron ore companies, BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, on these concessions on iron ore. The previous government had discussions, and it got to the point of probably getting some understanding, maybe in-principle agreement, that the concession would be removed for future production—future production meaning not production from this day forward, but the production of new mines. Therefore, all the existing mines—all the major resources—would continue into the indefinite future at the concessional rate. It would be only new mines that would pay the full or the normal Mining Act royalty. That deal—I do not decry or denigrate the effort—did not get to a conclusion. When this Liberal–National government came into power, members opposite said that we had thrown away that deal. Therefore, I did what I thought was a fairly obvious thing. I asked the state bureaucracy, “Is there a deal? Can you show me a document? Can you show me a signed document”, because if there was a deal, I was not going to ignore it. There was no concluded deal. To this day, there is no document that I have seen that was agreed between the Labor government and BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto. The former government tried, but it did not get there. It is all very well for members opposite to be self-righteous about what they did in government. They tried, but they did not get there. The announcement by BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto a little over a year ago that they proposed to have a production sharing arrangement for their Pilbara iron ore operations was a new dimension. It was the third time that they had proposed some sort of merger, and they are yet to get that in place. That obviously restarted the issue. At the time the announcement was made, my immediate off-the-cuff comment was that the industry had changed. In the 1990s when they tried that, I was the Minister for Resources Development, and the then government refused to allow it. It was interesting, because the companies were running around the world making all sorts of announcements to stock exchanges. However, they forgot the one essential ingredient; they forgot to ask the owner of the resource whether the owner of the resource—that is, the state government of the day— agreed, and I said we did not agree, and it collapsed, with the companies having spent millions of dollars on it. However, that is history. The issue reappeared in 2009, with their now third attempt at some merger operation. My response was that there are three obvious issues. One is the royalties concession; the second is the stamp duty on the transaction; and the third is third-party access to the rail infrastructure. They are the three big issues. Tonight members might say that local government rates are also an issue, and that has been raised in this place. We had discussions with BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto. I made the point to the heads of both BHP and Rio that there would have to be movement on the royalty rates, the removal of the concession, otherwise their merger proposal was going to go nowhere. I have a lot of time for Marius Kloppers, and recall very clearly saying to him, “Marius, you need to understand that the state of Western Australia is not particularly interested in selling to you and to Rio Tinto ever-increasing amounts of iron ore at half price.” That was the bottom line. So we agreed on two things and we signed a heads of agreement to that effect from June of this year. The two things that were agreed were, firstly, that BHP and Rio would pay the Mining Act royalty. That meant that the concessional rate on fines of 3.75 per cent would increase to the Mining Act rate of 5.625 per cent. That was agreed and, to the credit of both BHP and Rio, they accepted all the logic, that time had moved on, the concession was no longer valid, and that there was no sort of moral basis to that any more, and they voluntarily agreed to forgo that concession from 1 July. That is what the Iron Ore Agreements Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 does. The only thing this bill does is change the various state agreement acts—there are about 12 of them— to remove the fines concession of 3.75 per cent and raise it to the Mining Act rate, which happens to be 5.625 per cent. That is all this bill does; it simply changes the royalty. Therefore, I think members will agree with that, because that simple change means, at today’s prices, about $340 million a year extra for this financial year, and obviously into the future years, presumably increasing if prices hold up and tonnages increase. That applies to all production, existing and future mines. In terms of the forward estimates, it means about over $1 billion. I think that is a pretty good achievement for the state of Western Australia. That is what this bill is about; this bill stands by itself. It will apply whether or not BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto ever put their merger in place. It is agreed. This is a standalone piece of legislation. Even if the European Commission rules it out or they change their minds at the board level, this bill will go through when it receives royal assent, and BHP and Rio will pay the full Mining Act royalty whether or not they merge their operations. The only condition on this is that it goes through the Parliament and it gets royal assent.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5097

The second issue in the heads of agreement relates to allowing the companies to integrate their iron ore operations by sharing each other’s railways, blending ore from BHP and Rio mines to produce a suite of different mixtures of, or recipes for, iron ore, and the ability to share port facilities—whatever. There is a certain economic logic in allowing it to be as efficient as possible. Under the heads of agreement, we have agreed that we will bring in a second piece of legislation, which is yet to be drafted. That second piece of legislation will amend all these same agreement acts to allow them to share infrastructure, to integrate, to blend iron ore, and the like. In recognition of that, they have agreed that when that legislation is in the Parliament and passed and receives royal assent, they will pay a lump sum of $350 million to the state. We are not, in a sense, giving away everything. For example, obligations for the further processing of iron ore will remain, but we will, by mutual agreement, modernise those obligations so that they relate to the twenty-first century, not the 1960s. A lot of redundant, superfluous reporting requirements and processes will be done away with. As the minister responsible for those state agreements, I find myself signing pieces of paper that allow the companies to build sheds on their leases; they are not necessary and there a huge number of them. That was all there for, probably, valid reasons in the 1960s; they are not valid today. But the companies will still have the normal environmental approvals processes and the like in place. Those negotiations are taking place, literally, as we debate this bill. They are not concluded. They will look at the changes in sharing infrastructure, they will look at the processing obligations, and we will have a discussion about local government rating. I will not make any commitment on that, as that is not something that was in the heads of agreement, but there will be factors that come up. When those negotiations are completed—I hope they can be completed over the coming weeks—I will bring into the Parliament the second bill, which will deal with the integration of the iron ore operations and will make very clear exactly what the government and the companies are proposing. The Parliament will be able to look at the legislation and, contingent on that legislation passing, there is the obligation on the companies to pay $350 million to the state. I have indicated publicly that that will be paid into some sort of trust fund within Treasury, and it will be dedicated entirely to the construction of a new children’s hospital. That is the deal we have done. I believe it is a good deal, and the questions asked— particularly those asked by the member for Rockingham—are quite valid. I cannot tell members the exact nature of the detail because we have not concluded the negotiations on that yet. It will go to cabinet, and if cabinet agrees, the bill will come in and be there for everyone to see. We simply have not got to that point. While these two pieces of legislation, in a sense, relate to the same issue, they are independent. Again I emphasise that if BHP and Rio do not merge their operations, they have, in any case, as individual companies, agreed to pay the full Mining Act royalty. That stands regardless. Mr T.G. Stephens: Any progress on local government rates? Mr C.J. BARNETT: We have had some discussion about that, albeit limited. I do not know that local government rates will be dealt with in this context, but I do undertake to take the issue up with the companies. I do not necessarily favour some of the suggestions that have been made. My view is that I have always preferred an arrangement along the lines of some sort of rate equivalent, but I will come back to the issue of local government rating. Please understand what this bill is about. All this bill does is remove the concession on the fines royalty and put it in line with the Mining Act, which is the higher rate of 5.625 per cent. Another argument might be run at some stage in the future—certainly not in this term of government and on our horizon—which is whether the fines rate should be raised to the lump rate. If that were to happen, it would apply to all mining companies, including the juniors. We are not proposing to do that. That was discussed, and we agreed we would not pursue that, we would pursue removing the concession. The other major area of debate related to federal–state relations. I could not compete with the member for Riverton’s very learned exposition of the history of it and the peculiar role of the grants commission, but I will make a couple of points. I agree totally with what the member for Riverton said. The goods and services tax was introduced to replace the income tax sharing arrangements on company and income tax under the old commonwealth–state revenue sharing arrangements that followed when income taxes were transferred from the states to the commonwealth in the 1940s to help fund the war. That is all history. The GST was introduced as a tax, as the member for Riverton pointed out, the totality of which would go to the states. It was a new tax; it was a source of revenue that replaced states’ entitlement to share in income tax and company tax collections. A deal was done and it was put in place. The problem has not been the GST revenue source in total; GST has proved to be a successful tax, in the sense that as retail spending has grown, GST revenues have grown appreciably. There is no doubt that the commonwealth Treasury is observing that and wishes to get its hands on the GST revenue base. That is what this is all about. From the state of Western Australia’s point of view, I am arguing and putting the case—I have put it to both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition—that this is grossly unfair to Western Australia, and will inhibit the growth not only of this state, but of this nation. Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, I think, was

5098 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] reasonably accepting of that argument; I am not so sure about the current Prime Minister. Tony Abbott, as opposition leader, at least acknowledges it. There is some way to go. The policy position—I guess the fine point I have argued—is that we have been a net beneficiary over most of our history, and we are now a net contributor to the commonwealth. I accept that; this is a prosperous, growing state. My argument is that there should be a floor of 75c in the dollar. If we get back only 68c in the dollar, that will be a poor return given the big states of New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland each get back more than 90c in the dollar. In many respects, Queensland is a state comparable with Western Australia. It is indefensible. I have yet to meet a federal politician who will argue that we should be treated in a way that is somehow less than the way Queensland is treated. Mr M. McGowan: I agree. I would have said an 80c floor. But the deal requires every state to sign up, so why would another state sign up to it? Mr C.J. BARNETT: We live in wonderful times. The member for Rockingham basically said a year ago that I would never get an agreement out of BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto. We have one; it is on the table and it is in the hands of the Parliament to pass it. It was done. Mr M. McGowan: There is no joint venture between New South Wales and Victoria. Mr C.J. BARNETT: The member for Rockingham is being negative. He does not accept that we can get things done. Mr M. McGowan: The original deal was flawed. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I listened to the member for Rockingham. He seems to have no optimism about the future. Mr M.P. Whitely interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: The Labor Party in Western Australia very easily gives up. We do not; that is the difference. I think 75c in the dollar is a quite reasonable proposition. I have discussed this with other state Premiers. Mr M. McGowan: Of course; who disagrees with it? Mr M.P. Whitely: We’re not disagreeing with you, but how will you get them to agree? Mr C.J. BARNETT: If we do not have an objective, we have no chance of working out how to get there. Mr M. McGowan: It would have been far better in 1999 if we hadn’t done it. Mr C.J. BARNETT: The negativity from the mob opposite is overwhelming. Mr M.P. Whitely: We are asking the question; it’s not negativity. A government member: It’s too hard. Mr C.J. BARNETT: It is too hard for members opposite. Mr M.P. Whitely: Just share your wisdom with us. That’s all I’m asking. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Please! Let me give members opposite a scenario. Seventy-five cents in the dollar is a somewhat arbitrary amount, but I think it is reasonable. Members opposite might argue that it should be 80c and someone else might argue that it should be 70c. Let us for the moment accept the figure. That means that we will continue long term as a net contributor. If the decision to move on that is made within the next couple of years, the effect on the other states will be basically zero. Our share is 68c in the dollar now. If it were returned from 68c to 75c over, say, a three or four-year phase-in period, not another state in the country would notice it. It would have no impact at all. The other states would not see any loss of revenue; they might see just a slightly slower growth. They would see this state continue to grow and see the total collections of all commonwealth taxes, plus the GST, grow in relationship. If we leave the problem and do not act early, and the gap widens, it will become harder and harder to solve. The state has a lot to trade; we have a lot of power. We should not underestimate the power of the state of Western Australia in commonwealth–state relations today. In a sense, we have never had as much clout as we have now, even though the state’s GST share is going down. I will give members a scenario. Typically in the past decade or so, 50 per cent of Western Australia’s expenditure has been in the form of commonwealth payments—GST share, specific-purpose payments and the like. In the past year, it was down to about 45c. On state Treasury estimates, it is tracking down to 35 per cent. What does that tell us? That tells us that Western Australia is 65 per cent independent. That changes the dynamics of Council of Australian Governments and commonwealth–state relations. We are no longer the Sir Charles Court mendicant state; suddenly we are the most financially independent and strongest economy in the commonwealth. That is the change in the balance of power in both economic and political negotiations. That is our card. We should not play it in a ruthless way, but that is how we can negotiate change.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5099

We also have the benefit of our closeness with and integration into Asia. The member for Riverton is working with me on the relationship we are developing with Singapore, which offers all sorts of potential ways outside the narrow box that most of us may traditionally think in. That is our future—big international plays and a role for this state that perhaps Sir Charles Court could see back in the 1960s, but since then few have seen that potential. I remain optimistic; I think we can make a deal. The commonwealth needs the state of Western Australia to grow. When I first met former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who showed a genuine interest in Western Australia and an understanding of the issues, I commented to him that there is only one way he could solve the country’s budget deficit, and that would be with the growth of the Western Australian economy, particularly the offshore petroleum industry. He understood that. That is what will happen and what will pay off the deficit. We will continue that issue, but we will not throw in the towel. I am not wishing to be political, although it is hard not to be. I ask members opposite to think carefully about some of the propositions that are coming out of Canberra. They can argue for taxing minerals and for ad valorem royalties, profit-based regimes and all the rest of it. There is a logical economic argument in all of that. Maybe there should be a two-part tariff—a production charge, an ad valorem charge and a profits component on top, which would be a company tax component. One of the problems with a resource rent tax is that the companies in the petroleum industry, including LNG projects, will pay almost nothing for the gas they extract for up to 10 years. One project in commonwealth waters, which has been subject to resource rent tax, ended up paying nothing because of the way in which the various tax levels cut in. It developed a resource in commonwealth waters and did not pay a dollar to either the commonwealth or the state. It is a relatively small project, but an example of how the resource profits–based system also has lots of deficiencies. Perhaps there is no perfect taxation. If we simply say let us go profit based and therefore let the commonwealth manage it, we will give control of the industry to the commonwealth. Do not for a moment ever think this resource rent tax proposal is about raising $10 billion. It is about the commonwealth assuming complete control of the mining and petroleum industries of Australia. That is the agenda—nothing more, nothing less. It is not about the $10 billion. In the context of a federal budget, $10 billion is not a particularly large amount of money. This is all about control of the biggest industry in Australia and the industry with the greatest growth potential, which happens to be domiciled predominantly in Western Australia. Western Australia has 70 per cent of the nation’s petroleum and more than 50 per cent of the nation’s minerals. It is all about Western Australia and the resource base onshore and offshore. Do not just hand it away based on some short-term view about a profits-based tax. Members opposite criticised the GST and the like. I do not want to start this debate, but I take it that the Labor Party in Western Australia thinks we should hand over to the commonwealth one-third of the remaining GST we get, which would work out for us at 60 per cent of what we get. If we hand that over, what is that about? There are two agendas: firstly, it is control of the health system—namely, the hospitals in this state built, owned, operated and funded by the people of Western Australia. It would be a takeover of the complete control of our health system. Secondly, it is to get the commonwealth into sharing the growth revenues of the GST. State Labor governments and this Labor opposition quickly jumped in and said, “Yes; hand over a third of the GST.” They should not come in here and lecture us on standing up for Western Australia when they would give in so easily. When this mining tax was first mooted at a COAG meeting, some of the Labor Premiers said, “Yes, we’ll go along with that.” I went up to them quietly afterwards and asked them whether they had actually thought about it. The development of the oil shale gas projects in Queensland gives that state a massive economic opportunity that may be comparable with the wealth this state has got from the Pilbara. Why hand over our economic future to the commonwealth? That is crazy stuff. As long as there is a Liberal–National government, Western Australia will not go down that path. We are willing to pay into a joint fund for health, but we will only pay in, and we will keep control of our revenues from minerals and petroleum where we have jurisdiction and the GST. If we give that away, we might as well put the “For Sale” sign up on this Parliament because we will lose the sovereignty of Western Australia—nothing more, nothing less. Maybe some members opposite do not care about that, but that will be the consequence. A number of members spoke about the rating issue. It is a valid issue that was raised quite properly. There is history there also. The mining companies in the Pilbara and in other state agreement projects that built the infrastructure were given a further concession that they would not pay local government rates. My understanding of the situation is that it is not straightforward. When one looks at it, those concessions are not given on new agreement acts, and, as a number of them have been renegotiated, that concession has been removed or, in some cases, replaced with a negotiated rate equivalent payment. The first one of those, to my knowledge, was for the hot briquetted iron project in Port Hedland—I had a bit to do with that. Rating was not approved on the HBI plant, but an amount, from memory, of $50 000 a year was paid by BHP in lieu of rates. That, to me, was one way of progressing. There is sympathetic feeling towards that. While the companies on the state agreements do not generally pay local government royalties on their infrastructure—their mines, power stations, various crushing plants and whatever else—they do pay local government rates on company housing within the town and the sort of services that local government actually meets. They do pay that. Also, there are government assets, both commonwealth and state, that do not pay local government rates. The City of Nedlands does not collect

5100 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] local government rates on the QEII Medical Centre. The City of Fremantle does not collect local government rates on the port of the Fremantle. It is the same situation in both the public and private sector. There is some way to go, and I am prepared to take on that issue. I do not give a commitment that it will be resolved in the context of this negotiation. This negotiation is basically about $1.4 billion and allowing the companies to integrate. However, I hope that we can progress in some way the rate issue and we can get to a fairer outcome. I do not believe a fairer outcome is to give local government an unlimited right, basically, to rate huge capital expenditures. For example, if local government were to impose rates on the $20 billion of the North West Shelf project, that would not be an equitable outcome. Some reference was made to partnership agreements and the like. I will again digress and make a little observation, as I remarked at the local government conference. It may not have impressed people, but I made the observation that there are three tiers of government—federal, state and local. The Australian Constitution was a sharing of powers between the then British colonies to become the states with the newly to be created commonwealth government. That was sharing of powers. Local government is created by the state governments. It is not a sharing of powers; it is a delegation of powers to local government. It is quite a different relationship. We have a partnership agreement and we want to recognise and deal with local government. But, again, it relates to this rating issue over assets. It is not a sharing of powers; it is a delegation of responsibilities to local government. Let us keep the balance right. Let us understand the constitutional and legal relationship, and get it right. I thank members. It was a long debate and a lot of interesting points were made. I thank all members for their comments and for their support of this bill. Again, the real debate on the detail of the changes is not in this bill. This bill does one thing: it removes the concession on fines ore royalties and therefore changes the royalty rate on that from 3.75 per cent to 5.625 per cent across these various agreement acts. It stands alone whether BHP and Rio merge. If the Parliament passes this, the state of Western Australia will pick up from those companies another $340 million a year. Hopefully, in about two months I will introduce the second bill, which makes the more substantive adjustments to the structure of the agreement act. If that is passed, there will be a lump sum payment of $350 million to the state that will be dedicated to the children’s hospital. Question put and passed. Bill read a second time. Leave granted to proceed forthwith to third reading. Third Reading Bill read a third time, on motion by Mr C.J. Barnett (Minister for State Development), and transmitted to the Council. APPROVALS AND RELATED REFORMS (NO. 4) (PLANNING) BILL 2009 Council’s Amendments Amendments made by the Council now considered. Consideration in Detail The amendments made by the Council were as follows — No 1 Page 6, after line 9 — To insert — (3B) Before making a recommendation under subsection (1)(b) in relation to an improvement plan that authorises the making of an improvement scheme to apply to land in the district of a local government, the Commission must consult with the local government. (3C) An improvement plan that authorises the making of an improvement scheme must set out the objectives of the improvement scheme. No 2 Page 6, before line 11 — To insert — (3) After section 119(4) insert: (5A) The Minister must, as soon as is practicable after notice in respect of an improvement plan is published under subsection (4), cause a copy of the improvement plan to be laid before each House of Parliament or dealt with under section 268A.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5101

No 3 Page 7, after line 25 — To insert — (3A) Before submitting an improvement scheme or amendment to an improvement scheme to the Minister under section 87, the Commission must consult with any affected local government. (3B) In subsection (3A) — affected local government means — (a) in the case of an improvement scheme — a local government in the district of which the improvement scheme is proposed to apply; and (b) in the case of an amendment — a local government in the district of which the improvement scheme applies. No 4 Page 31, lines 5 to 10 — To delete the lines. No 5 Page 34, lines 6 to 14 — To delete the lines. No 6 Page 34, after line 25 — To insert — 171F. Review of Regulations (1) An appropriate Standing Committee of the Legislative Council is to carry out a review of the operation and effectiveness of all regulations made under this Part as soon as practicable after the expiry of 2 years from the day on which regulations made under this Part first come into operation. (2) The Standing Committee is to prepare a report based on the review and, as soon as practicable after the report is prepared, is to cause the report to be laid before each House of Parliament. No 7 Page 36, lines 17 to 21 — To delete the lines. No 8 Page 38, line 16 — To delete “(5) or ”and insert — (5), 119(5A) or No 9 Page 38, line 17 — To delete “order” and insert — order, improvement plan No 10 Page 38, line 21 — To delete “order” and insert — order, improvement plan No 11 Page 38, line 26 — To delete “order” and insert — order, improvement plan No 12 Page 38, line 28 — To delete “order” and insert — order, improvement plan No 13 Page 39, line 1 — To delete “order” and insert — order, improvement plan No 14 Page 43, after line 7 — To insert —

5102 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(4) The Minister must, as soon as is practicable after an order is given to the local government under subsection (1), cause a copy of the order to be laid before each House of Parliament or dealt with under section 268A. Leave granted for the amendments to be considered together. Mr J.H.D. DAY: I move — That the amendments made by the Council be agreed to. This bill has passed through the Legislative Council. During the debate in the Council a number of amendments were agreed to by the government. In some cases they were moved by the government, in other cases by the opposition, and in one case an amendment was moved by the Greens. The amendments, although not essential, have the effect of improving the transparency and accountability in some cases and they come out of what was generally a cooperative approach between the opposition and government and a degree of give and take, so to speak, in making some changes to the bill. I will go through some of the purposes of the amendments, broadly speaking. Amendments 1 to 3 deal with improvement plans and improvement schemes and have the effect of improving the transparency and consultation requirements of improvement plans and schemes. These improvements, firstly, will ensure that, before making a recommendation to the minister that an improvement plan be declared, the WA Planning Commission must consult with the local government or governments of the district subject to the improvement plan. Secondly, if the improvement plan provides for an improvement scheme to be prepared, the improvement plan must set out the objectives of the proposed improvement scheme. Thirdly, the Minister for Environment must ensure that a copy of the improvement plan will be laid on the table of both houses of Parliament as soon as practicable after the notice approving the improvement plan is published. That is fairly self-explanatory. Amendments 4 and 5 relate to development assessment panels and delete some lines, in particular the lines that provide the power for the regulations to vary the terms of the Planning and Development Act or other planning instruments. Those amendments were moved by the opposition. Section 171E(2)(b), which provides a power for the minister to direct local governments to provide staff and facilities to development assessment panels, and section 171E(2)(c), which provides the power to make regulations requiring local governments to pay costs of development assessment panels, will be deleted, and proposed new section 171F will be inserted. In fact, amendment 6 relates to this aspect and also to development assessment panels. In particular, it introduces a new section 171F to ensure that a review of the regulations supporting the provisions of development assessment panels is carried out by an appropriate standing committee of the Legislative Council after they have been in operation for two years. It was always intended that there would be a review of the regulations relating to development assessment panels. The Legislative Council, and the opposition in the Council in particular, was very keen for that review to be carried out by a committee of the Legislative Council and we have agreed to that. Amendment 7 also deletes some lines; in particular the proposed section 77A(2) of the Planning and Development Act. The power of the minister to make a direction will no longer be limited to state planning policies that do not apply throughout the state. The reason for this amendment was out of concern that there may not be clarity in determining which state planning policies do or do not apply throughout the state. For example, although the SPP on coastal setbacks impacts only on local governments on the coast, the SPP is expressed to apply throughout the state. Although the intention is to use this power only to implement state planning policies that affect only certain areas, such as coastal areas or wetlands or industrial buffer zones, the proposed section would allow the minister to issue directions to implement SPPs that apply to all local governments throughout the state. However, it is not likely that the Western Australian Planning Commission would ever recommend the initiation of approximately 140 local planning scheme amendments but, rather, that it would amend the general provisions under proposed new section 256 in cases — Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I would really love to hear the rest of the explanation from the minister; I welcome his words of wisdom. Mr J.H.D. DAY: I thank the Leader of the House. Just to complete that explanation — Mr M. McGowan: You’re filibustering! Mr J.H.D. DAY: Not exactly. To reiterate, it is unlikely that the planning commission would ever recommend the initiation of approximately 140 local planning scheme amendments but, rather, that it would amend the general provisions under proposed new section 256 in cases in which new provisions in all local planning schemes were necessary or desirable to implement a state planning policy. That amendment was moved by the opposition. The government agreed to it, although we did not really think that it was necessary to remove the proposed limitation to amend state planning policies. It meant that it could in

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5103 theory be applied across the state to all local governments, but it is extremely unlikely that such a power would be used in such a way because there are better ways to achieve it. Amendments 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 to clause 50 are consequential amendments related to the amendment to section 119, which requires that improvement plans be laid before both houses of Parliament. The consequential amendments are to proposed section 268A, which deals with the process that will be followed when a document is required to be tabled before Parliament and Parliament is not sitting. Therefore, that takes into account the requirement to table an improvement plan before both houses of Parliament and ensures the appropriate process is followed. The final amendment, amendment 14, is to ensure that a direction given by the Minister for Planning under section 76 for a local government to amend its scheme is laid before both houses of Parliament. That amendment was moved, I think, by Hon Lynn MacLaren, one of the Greens (WA) members, and the government was quite happy to agree to that. Therefore, although the debate in the Legislative Council took somewhat longer than perhaps we might have anticipated, there was generally a cooperative approach taken with the outcome that those amendments have been agreed to by the government or in some cases moved by the government. I commend the amendments to the house. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I agree that these amendments do provide more accountability for the changes that the government is making to the Planning and Development Act. Amendment 1 will insert proposed new section 119(3B), which states — Before making a recommendation under subsection (1)(b) in relation to an improvement plan that authorises the making of an improvement scheme to apply to land … the Commission must consult with the local government. This is the plan, so, yes, the Western Australian Planning Commission will consult with local government. In my case that would be the City of Melville. Amendment 2 will insert proposed new section 119(5A), which states — The Minister must, as soon as is practicable after notice in respect of an improvement plan is published under subsection (4), cause a copy of the improvement plan to be laid before each House of Parliament … However, minister, it is the outcome of that plan that people are concerned about. I would have been much happier if the scheme amendment were actually laid before the houses of Parliament. As I mentioned to the minister, I was going to ask a question this week, but I will ask it next week so that he has more time to consult with the WAPC. However, these amendments are very pertinent to my community, which has the Canning Bridge precinct vision on the table. Just this morning at a meeting between residents in South Perth and residents in my area, we were notified that the City of South Perth has sent some residents a letter saying that it has come to an agreement on some changes and it will now present that to a meeting. The city said that the meeting is by invitation only. I am not sure whether hundreds of people were going to turn up at that meeting, but people are very unhappy that they have not been involved in the consultation. Therefore, although these amendments are an improvement on what we had previously, stating that “the Commission must consult with the local government” still does not get to the heart of the problem—namely, that the community should have a say in what the developments are likely to be in their area. Some areas have very poor communication between local government and ratepayers. That is the case for residents who live in my area; they feel that the City of Melville really is not communicating with them on this issue. Even today at lunchtime, the member for Willagee had the CEO and Mayor of the City of Melville to lunch, and I asked them what was happening. They said that nothing was happening and that nothing had happened yet. I said that it was funny that the City of South Perth is consulting, yet the City of Melville is not. Therefore, I believe that these amendments will at least give people an opportunity to hear what is happening and the local member will know. The community may find out from the local member that plans are afoot to make changes in the area, if they do not hear from their local council. However, I believe that it would have been more in the community’s interests if the amendment scheme that was finalised were laid before both houses of Parliament, not the improvement plan. I am pleased that there will be a review of these regulations. If the minister drives through my area, he will see that big posters are going up on all the blocks saying no to five storeys, no to 10 storeys and no to 20 storeys. Therefore, the government will be lobbied continuously over what is happening at Canning Bridge because members of the community feel that the City of Melville has let them down. They are very hopeful that this government will not let them down and will not do the same thing that the City of Melville has done. Mr J.H.D. DAY: The member for Alfred Cove made the statement that the community should have a say on changes to planning arrangements. I entirely agree. That is very much provided for in the existing act. The community would have the opportunity to make submissions to any improvement schemes that are prepared under the umbrella of an improvement plan. There would be the normal advertising and consultation processes

5104 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] that exist at the moment, as they do in relation to an amendment to a local planning scheme. Some people may not be happy with the final outcome in some cases but, generally speaking, it is what the whole planning system is all about. Decisions about how land will be used is a matter of trying to get the balance right between various competing needs and concerns in the community. That process will still very much apply. In relation to the Canning Bridge area in particular, I have not been updated in recent times as to how the whole process is going but I am sure that further consultation is taking place. If the member for Alfred Cove has concerns about the approach of the City of Melville, I am sure she has the opportunity of taking those issues up directly with the City of Melville as well as in Parliament. Most of us have a reasonably close relationship with local governments in our particular electorates; I am sure that the member for Alfred Cove is no exception. In the broader context, as we made the point in the debate on this bill a couple of months or so ago, given the growth pressures we have in Perth and Western Australia, the state needs to be able to plan for that growth and be able to make decisions in a balanced way and use more contemporary and effective legislation than has been the case to this point. With the agreement of these amendments and putting the bill into effect, I have no doubt this will be achieved. Mr M. McGOWAN: I feel that the opposition must comment on these amendments, despite the fact that it has been a government show thus far. We are dealing with all of the amendments as one. We are supportive of them. Some of them were moved by the members of the opposition in the upper house and a member of the Greens (WA). I understand that it was a very interesting debate and the minister was present for some parts of it. He attempted to manage things from outside the chamber and it was an interesting experience for him, managing some of his upper house colleagues in relation to this. He may have had some difficulty in that regard at some point. My question relates to amendments 1 and 3. There are proposed subsections that indicate that there must be consultation with any affected local government on any improvement plan, improvement scheme, amendment or so on. There is no definition of “consultation”. When we have legislation that is open-ended like that, what is consultation? The bill says that there must be consultation with the local government. Does that mean writing a letter, making a phone call or having a chat with local government? It is hard to say. Ill-defined legislation is often not the best. There might be some argument from councils as to whether they were consulted because there is no definition. I do not have a copy of the original legislation and do not know whether it has a definition of “consultation”. I would have thought that we should have had a definition along those lines. Perhaps that should have been included when the bill was amended in the other place. That is my question. I am seeking some advice from the minister. Depending upon his answer, in the future it might help people work out what they are required to do. Mr J.H.D. DAY: The definition of “consultation” is provided for in quite a number of acts of Parliament. There is certainly a story around that maybe some longer term members of the opposition could comment on more accurately than I. The story is that when Brian Burke was Premier, he was required to consult with the Leader of the Opposition about a particular appointment and virtually only informed the Leader of the Opposition that that is what he was planning to do and then went ahead and did it. That is a very minimalist approach to consultation. What is intended in this amendment — Mr M. McGowan: I would have thought that would be standard Premier behaviour. Mr J.H.D. DAY: It was certainly standard Brian Burke behaviour. I do not think that would be standard Colin Barnett behaviour and possibly not standard behaviour for a number of Premiers since Brian Burke. It certainly would have been pretty typical of the way he went about business. I assume that there is some precedence established in court cases about consultation. In the end it would come down to a decision of a court if there were some doubt as to whether there was some infringement of the act and the intentions of Parliament. Clearly, it is intended that there would be meaningful consultation. Presumably, something in writing would be sent to the particular local government. There may be discussions between the minister of the day or the chairman of the planning commission or director general of the department and the mayor or shire president or whatever the case may be. I would expect that something would be sent in writing and a response from the relevant local government would be received in writing, without allowing the process to be delayed unduly. There would be an expectation that if local government is being given the opportunity to comment, it would reply in a timely manner and without unduly delaying the process. If it was not prepared to do that, an attempt at consultation would have been made but it would not have taken up the opportunity. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I wonder whether the minister can confirm something. Proposed subsection (5A) states — The Minister must, as soon as is practicable after notice in respect of an improvement plan is published under subsection (4) … I did not realise we were going onto this bill this evening, so I do not have a copy of it with me.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5105

Mr J.H.D. Day: What are you referring to? Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Amendment 2, which states, in part — After section 119(4) insert: (5A) The Minister must, as soon as is practicable after notice in respect of an improvement plan is published under subsection (4), is published under subsection 4 … Where will that improvement plan be published? Will it be published in the Government Gazette? Whilst the government has good intentions to consult with local governments, members of this house need to know if something is going on. Where do we keep an eye on these things if we do not hear from local government? Is it the Government Gazette? Mr J.H.D. DAY: It is the usual practice that these instruments and decisions are published in the Government Gazette, and that is what I expect would be the case in this particular situation. Question put and passed; the Council’s amendments agreed to. The Council acquainted accordingly. House adjourned at 10.08 pm ______

5106 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

Questions and answers are as supplied to Hansard.

PUBLIC SERVANTS ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND MARKETING ACTIVITIES 2905. Mr E.S. Ripper to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development I refer the Premier to each department and agency under the Premier’s control, including his office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing, or speechwriting, including: (i) public; (ii) corporate; and (iii) media relations; (b) what is the salary band for each of these employees; (c) what is the job title for each of these employees; (d) what entitlements do these employees receive (such as phone and vehicle entitlements); and (e) for each employee please provide an itemised breakdown for: (i) phone entitlements; and (ii) vehicle entitlements. Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Information as at 29 April 2010: Department of the Premier and Cabinet (including the Premier and all the other Ministers' Offices): (a) Please refer to answers in parts (b-e ii). (b)-(e) [See paper 2377.] Public Sector Commissioner: (a) 3 (b) $81,501–$90,249; $62,959–$66,538 and $55,913–$60,707 (c) Senior Communications Officer; InterSector Coordinator and Communications Officer. (d)-(e) Nil Department of State Development: (a) 3 (b) PSGA Level 6 — $81,501–$90,249; PSGA Level 6 — $81,501–$90,249 and PSGA Level 5 — $70,037–$77,405. (c) Coordinator, Communications and Media; Publications and Marketing Coordinator and Promotions Coordinator. (d) Coordinator, Communications and Media — Mobile Phone Publications and Marketing Coordinator — Mobile Phone Promotions Coordinator — Not applicable (e) (i) Coordinator Communications and Media — business and after hours calls Publications and Marketing Coordinator — business and after hours call (ii) Not applicable Acting Commissioner of the Public Sector Standards: (a) Nil (b)-(e) Not applicable Lotterywest: (a) 12 (b)-(e) [See paper 2377.]

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5107

Gold Corporation: (a) 12 (b)–(c) Sales & Marketing Director $160,000–$190,000 Wholesale Manager $100,000–$120,000 E Business Manager $100,000–$120,000 Public Relations Manager $70,0000–$90,000 Australian Wholesale Manager $85,000–$95,000 Catalogue Manager $70,000–$85,000 Copywriter $60,000–$75,000 International Sales Executive $55,000–$75,000 E Business Co–ordinator $50,000–$60,000 Marketing Co–ordinator $50,000–$60,000 Events & Promotions Co–ord $45,000–$55,000 Marketing Assistant $45,000–$55,000 (d)-(e) No vehicle entitlements for any employee. Company mobiles are provided for the Sales & Marketing Director and Wholesale Manager. Office of the Auditor General (a)-(e) One, Manager Communications, Level 7, Mobile Phone. (Note the primary role of this position is to prepare reports for tabling and publication). Department of Treasury and Finance (a) (i) 3 (ii) 0 (iii) 2 (b)-(e) Manager Corporate Communications Level 7 Mobile phone for business use as per DTF policy Senior Communications Officer Level 6 Nil Senior Communications Officer Level 6 Nil ICWA (a)-(e) One, Public Relations Manager, Level 6, Phone, car bay and fuel card. Western Australian Treasury Corporation (a) Nil (b)-(e) Not applicable GESB (a) 11 (b)-(e) General Manager Marketing & Strategy GESB Contract Phone Head of Marketing Communications GESB Contract Phone Head of Retail Marketing GESB Contract Nil Manager Corporate Communications Equivalent PSGA Level 8 Phone Marketing Manager Equivalent PSGA Level 8 Nil

5108 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Manager Product Communications Equivalent PSGA Level 8 Nil Marketing Manager Super & Retirement Equivalent PSGA Level 7 Nil Manager Internal Communications Equivalent PSGA Level 6 Nil Digital Marketing Manager Equivalent PSGA Level 5 Nil Product Communication Manager Equivalent PSGA Level 4 Nil Communications Coordinator Equivalent PSGA Level 4 Nil. SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE — STAFF 2968. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier (1) What was the total number of officers in the Senior Executive Service as at: (a) 23 September 2008; (b) 1 January 2009; (c) 30 June 2009; (d) 31 December 2009; and (e) 14 May 2010? (2) What was the wages bill for members of the Senior Executive Service as at: (a) 23 September 2008; (b) 1 January 2009; (c) 30 June 2009; (d) 31 December 2009; and (e) 14 May 2010? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Public Sector Commissioner advises: (1) The data base used to collect information regarding Senior Executive Service (SES) members does not provide information at the dates specified. Accordingly figures from reports that correspond closest to the dates specified have been provided as indicated below. (a) 23 September 2008 (report printed on 30 September 2008) 374 (b) 1 January 2009 (report printed on 12 January 2009) 380 (c) 30 June 2009 (report printed on 1 July 2009) 395 (d) 31 December 2009 (report printed on 6 January 2010) 404 (e) 14 May 2010 (report printed on 25 May 2010) 413 It should be noted that the increase in SES numbers can be attributed to a range of reasons including the implementation of government policy initiatives, machinery of government changes and an increase in the demand for services. The figures do not take into account all SES officers who will be ceasing employment under the Government's targeted separation officer. Notwithstanding this increase, the former Labor Government endorsed a SES employment target ratio of between 0.38% and 0.40%. Analysis of data confirms that the SES employment ratio for the specified periods between 23 September 2008 and 14 May 2010, has remained within the ratio of 0.38% and 0.40% set by the former Government.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5109

(2) The Public Sector Commission does not collect specific information regarding the wages paid to each SES member. The payment of wages for each SES member is the responsibility of the relevant employing authority. INFILL SEWERAGE PROGRAM — FUNDING 3089. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Water In reference to the $100m allocated in this year’s budget to complete the Infill Sewerage Program over the next four years: (a) will the Minister advise if the schedule for completion for the Infill Sewerage Program for Port Hedland is included in scope of works for: (i) the 2009–2010 financial year; or (ii) the 2010–2011 financial year; and (b) if not, why not? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a)-(b) Please see below text from media statement released on Thursday 5 August 2010. Port Hedland is the first cab off the rank for new $100 million infill sewerage program. Water Minister Graham Jacobs today announced two adjoining areas of Port Hedland, involving more than 250 residential blocks, would be provided with a sewerage service, funded from the Liberal-National Government's $100million Infill Sewerage Program. Speaking in Port Hedland, Dr Jacobs said it was expected that tenders would be called for the estimated $7.5million project within three months with work expected to start next March and be completed in the spring of 2012. The areas involved were bounded by Anderson, Sutherland, Morgan and McGregor streets. Much of this area had been rezoned as part of the Port Hedland Land Use Master Plan. "I am very pleased to be here today to announce the first projects to be awarded for the 2010- 11 year will see sewerage connections installed in the Pilbara — the powerhouse of Australia," he said. "I recently visited the area and am satisfied that it meets all the health and other criteria for an immediate go ahead. "In the past two years, many of the lots to be sewered through this package have been rezoned under the Port Hedland Land Use Master Plan from R30 to R50 and R80 meaning there will be a lot of people living there in the future, making infill sewerage a key priority." The Minister said while the Water Corporation had completed detailed design for these projects, the preliminaries to works component would take about three months to complete. "That means the corporation will be able to call tenders just before Christmas," he said. "It is expected work will get under way in March 2011 following the wet season and continue over two winter cycles." Dr Jacobs said the Government would allocate $2million to allow the Water Corporation to undertake investigation and design work in various projected infill project areas across the State to get them 'shovel ready'. "We are examining further priority areas and the release of this money will allow for a head start on projects for the future," he said. "Expect further announcements on projects in the next few months." The Water Corporation will shortly inform the local community of all details of the Port Hedland projects. PARENTS AND CITIZENS (P&C) COMMITTEES — PROSECUTIONS 3090. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education (1) What processes are in place for parents and citizens (P&C) committees facing legal prosecution? (2) If a P&C committee is facing legal prosecution what assistance could the Department for Education offer? (3) What other options are available to P&C committee facing legal prosecution?

5110 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (1)-(3) Government school Parents and Citizens' Associations, pursuant to s145 of the School Education Act 1999, are incorporated associations under the Associations Incorporation Act 1987. Incorporation of a Parents and Citizens' Association means that it becomes a legal entity in its own right, separate from the Department of Education. As a separate legal entity, it is a matter for the Parents and Citizens' Association to respond to legal proceedings against it. If the principal of the school believes the Department of Education can be of assistance to the Parents and Citizens' Association in the circumstances, the principal can raise the matter with the school's line management and the matter will be considered by the Department on a case by case basis. PUBLIC HOUSING — ENERGY EFFICIENCY AUDIT 3092. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan to the Minister for Housing At the special Council of Australian Governments’ (COAG) meeting in February 2009, leaders agreed to audit the energy efficiency of their existing public housing stocks, and consider implementing a program of cost efficient upgrades. In relation to this, I ask: (a) What action has the Department of Housing taken to act on that agreement, in particular: (i) how many homes have been audited; (ii) how many upgrades have been approved; and (iii) how many upgrades have been undertaken? (b) Has Western Australia filed a report back to COAG, and will the Minister table this? (c) What assistance is the Minister prepared to provide Homeswest tenants who need energy efficiency audits and upgrades to contain spiralling energy costs? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (a) (i)-(iii) The Department is currently developing a program to audit 10,000 dwellings per year which is expected to commence in 2011. The Office of Energy has the regulatory framework, inspector accreditation and coordination responsibility in WA. It is envisaged that the audit program will begin after the Office of Energy has determined the audit requirements. (b) No — to date no reporting to COAG has been required although the Department has submitted high level implementation plans to the Commonwealth Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. (c) The Department is currently developing a program funded through the Office of Energy under the Hardship Efficiency Grants Scheme (HUGS) for tenants in hardship to receive upgraded, energy efficient appliances and also ceiling insulation (where none is already fitted). ANIMAL WELFARE UNIT — TRANSFER TO AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT 3094. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan to the Minister for Local Government (1) Have any representations been made to the Minister by industry groups or by the Minister for Agriculture to transfer all, or part of, the Animal Welfare Unit (which currently sits within the Department of Local Government) to the Department of Agriculture and, if so, who made these representations? (2) Will the Minister provide unequivocal commitment to keep the unit within the Department of Local Government, and thereby protect its integrity? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: (1) No such representations have been made to me by industry groups. I encourage dialogue between my office and the Minister for Agriculture's office about the proper and humane care and management of production animals in Western Australia. (2) The Government is committed to managing animal welfare with a high level of professionalism. In the case of production animals, a professional approach includes collaboration between the Department of Local Government, other agencies and industry.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5111

TEACHER ASSISTANTS IN 2010 3096. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education What was the total number of teacher assistants (full time equivalents) employed by the Department of Education and Training as of March 2010? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: As at 18 March 2010, there were 6188.9 FTE teacher assistants employed in the Department of Education. SECONDARY SCHOOL GRANTS 3097. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education (1) What was the school grant provided to each secondary school in 2008? (2) What was the school grant provided to each secondary school in 2009? (3) What was the school grant provided to each secondary school in 2010? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (1)-(3) School grant allocations to all secondary schools for 2008, 2009 and 2010 are attached. [See paper 2389.] The reasons for the disparity between the grant allocations to secondary schools across 2008, 2009 and 2010 are: • The impact of the half cohort in 2010. Components of the school grant are determined by actual student numbers. In 2010 the half cohort entered year eight, reducing the number of students enrolled in secondary schools, with a corresponding increase in primary schools. • The inclusion of the School Support Programs Resource Allocation within school grants from 2009. • The discontinuation of the $100 Government Secondary Subsidy payment to secondary schools from 2010. SECONDARY SCHOOL FEES 3098. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education (1) What was the dollar value of school fees collected by each Senior High School in 2009? (2) What was the dollar value of school fees collected by each District High School in 2008? (3) What was the dollar value of school fees collected by each District High School in 2009? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (1) The dollar value of school fees collected by each Senior High School in 2009 is provided in the attached below. [See paper 2388.] The school fees cover voluntary contributions, charges, personal items and other services, adult student fees and full fee paying fees. (2)-(3) The dollar value of school fees collected by each District High School in 2008 and 2009 is provided in the table attached. [See paper 2388.] The school fees cover voluntary contributions, charges, personal items and other services, adult student fees and full fee paying fees. OFFICE OF HERITAGE – DIGITALISATION OF DATA AND RECORDS 3099. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Heritage In relation to the Minister’s answer to Question on Notice No. 2750, and his statement that the Office of Heritage does not have sufficient space to allow for onsite storage of closed volumes and place related materials, I ask, what business cases have been put forward, and what is the anticipated cost to fix this problem by digitalising all its data and needed records? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: Heritage Council of Western Australia A Business Case has not been undertaken to examine the need, benefits and cost of digitalising all of the Office of Heritage data and records. OFFSITE DATA AND RECORDS STORAGE PROVIDERS 3100. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Treasurer Please table the list of offsite data and records storage providers recommended to agencies on the current Common Use Arrangements issued by the Department of Treasury and Finance.

5112 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: The Department of Treasury and Finance has two Common Use Arrangements (CUA) for the storage, retrieval and destruction of paper and electronic records. Contractors under the legacy CUA 123499 are Manford Records Management Pty Ltd Trading as Compu-Stor, Recall Information Management Pty Ltd and Totally Confidential Records Management. Contractors under CUA 34504 are Iron Mountain Australia Pty Ltd, Jademark Holdings Pty Ltd Trading as Specialist Security Shredding, Recall Information Management Pty Ltd, Visy Board Pty Ltd and Western Recycling Pty Ltd. ELECTRONIC FILES AND RECORDS — DIGITALISATION 3101. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests In relation to the Minister’s answer to Question on Notice No. 2750, and his statement that officers cannot access old electronic versions of files and volumes and therefore the physical files must be ordered in, I ask: (a) what is the format of the corrupted files; and (b) what is the timeline for achieving full digitalisation of all files and records in the Minister’s departments and agencies? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: Department of Local Government including the Office of Multicultural Interests (a) The Department's electronic records date back to 2005 and are all electronically accessible. (b) The Department will be implementing digitisation of all records during the next 12 months. Heritage Council of Western Australia (a) Not Applicable (b) As the Office of Heritage has not undertaken a business case, there is no timeline for achieving full digitalisation of all files and records. ONLINE WA MULTICULTURAL COMMUNITIES — GATEWAY REMOVAL 3103. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Interests I refer to the answers provided to Question on Notice No. 2687, and ask: (a) who carried out the independent review of the Online WA Multicultural Communities (OWAMC) in November 2008, and will the Minister release the report for comment; (b) how many OWAMC members were able to transfer their web content onto their own websites, and at what cost; (c) will the Government consider reinstating the service and allow the community to access the seven years of information that has been mostly lost, given that, with advances in technology, the cost to Government to set up an alternative platform to deliver the OWAMC gateway will go down; and (d) when were the options provided to OWAMC members to make their information public, and what were they? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: (a) On 3 November 2008, the Vivid Group — a local communications and technology services company based in Perth — was contracted to undertake the review. As an operational document, the review report is not intended for public comment. (b) Aside from the Ethnic Communities Council of WA, the Australian Asian Association and the Australian Anglo-Indian Association, the Office of Multicultural Interests (OMI) is not aware of how many OWAMC members were able to transfer their web content onto other websites or the costs of doing so. (c) No. (d) In June 2009, OWAMC members were advised of alternative commercial platforms available for transfer of their websites and were asked to move their web content to one of those platforms. Those unable to do so were advised that OMI would provide their files on a CD/DVD on request. HOSPITALS — SERVICES AND WORKLOADS 3104. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Health (1) What are the current Level 5 and Level 6 (Tertiary) services available at: (a) Fremantle Hospital;

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5113

(b) Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital (SCGH); and (c) Royal Perth Hospital (RPH)? (2) In relation to trauma centres in Western Australia, I ask: (a) what is the evidence behind the decision to now have 2 major trauma centres for the population of Western Australia when the initial Trauma Report following the Reid Report strongly recommended that there be 1 major trauma centre for Perth, so as to concentrate expertise thereby improving outcome, with other metropolitan hospitals having metropolitan trauma centres; and (b) was the Victorian Trauma Plan considered in that evidence, given its long term implementation and success based around 1 major trauma centre (the Alfred Hospital) serving a much larger population than Western Australia? (3) What Level 5 and Level 6 (Tertiary Services) are proposed to remain at Royal Perth Hospital given it will also be a major trauma centre? (4) Will Level 5 and Level 6 (Tertiary Services) include neurosurgery, given the Health Department has received a report from a neurosurgery working party recommending one neurosurgical service at SCGH until the population of Western Australia increases sufficiently for a second service at Fiona Stanley Hospital in approximately 2025? (5) Using just one discipline, cardiothoracic surgery, could the Minister provide figures for 2006– 2007, 2007–2008 and 2008–2009 for the following: (a) the cost per patient treated and cost per Diagnosis Related Group for: (i) Fremantle; (ii) SCGH; and (iii) RPH; (b) the workload per service (i.e. the number and type of cases) and the capacity (i.e. how many cases can be done in a year) at: (i) Fremantle; (ii) SCGH; and (iii) RPH; (c) the number of bypass procedures for each consultant surgeon (to ensure that case loads achieve minimum standard) at: (i) Fremantle; (ii) SCGH; and (iii) RPH; and (d) the costs and service/consultant workloads benchmarked to national averages (as per the National Demonstration Hospital Program) at: (i) Fremantle; (ii) SCGH; and (iii) RPH? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (1) The specific capabilities that determine the role delineation level of a clinical specialty would vary depending on the specialty. A Level 6 service is a tertiary or higher level service that can provide a centre of excellence and principal referral capabilities. A Level 5 service is one that can provide care to highly complex cases that do not necessarily require tertiary or principal referral resources and expertise. (a) The current Level 5 services available at Fremantle Hospital (FH) include the surgical services for Vascular and Trauma as well as mental health inpatient services for older persons. In addition, the current Level 6 services available at FH include Emergency Services, Rehabilitation Services, Disaster Preparedness, Adult and Older Persons mental health services and a broad range of surgical, medical and clinical support services as detailed in [see paper 2380 ].

5114 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) The current Level 5 services available at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital (SCGH) include the surgical services for Trauma, Rehabilitation services and Adult Mental Health Services including emergency and inpatient care. In addition, the current Level 6 services available at SCGH include Emergency Services, Disaster Preparedness, the full range of medical services, all surgical services except for Burns and Gynaecology and all adult clinical support services as detailed in [see paper 2380 ]. (c) The current Level 5 services available at Royal Perth Hospital (RPH) include rehabilitation services and Adult mental Health services for inpatients. In addition, the current Level 6 services available at RPH include Emergency Services, Adult Emergency Mental Health Services, Disaster Preparedness, and the full range of surgical services except for Gynaecology, all medical and all adult clinical support services as detailed in [see paper 2380]. (2) (a) The State Government's election commitment was to maintain RPH as a tertiary hospital. As such, it is Government policy to retain RPH as a 400 bed tertiary facility with major trauma capability and it has remained as such within the scope of the latest version of the Clinical Services Framework 2010-2020. The Government undertook to maintain the role of the Fiona Stanley Hospital with respect to trauma. (b) Yes, the Victorian Trauma Plan as well as trauma plans of other jurisdictions were considered. (3) All current Level 5 and Level 6 (tertiary) services currently in RPH are proposed to remain except for Oncology, Radiation Oncology and Rehabilitation. Medical services in Palliative Care and Infectious Diseases and surgery services for Burns patients will become L4 services. [See paper 2380.] (4) The Level 6 services will include neurosurgery in a similar model to that which currently exists. Although neurosurgery is currently conducted at two sites, SCGH and RPH, this arrangement reflects a single neurosurgical service provided at two sites delineated into care for trauma cases at one site and for non-trauma cases at the other. (5) (a)-(b) [See paper 2380.] (c) (i) Average 39 (ii) Average 33 (iii) Average 45 The number of bypass procedures performed by each consultant surgeon at each hospital varies greatly. The average number of bypass procedures per consultant surgeon in 2008/09 in each of the three facilities is given above. These numbers do not include the work of surgeons who did less than 10 bypass procedures in that hospital, in that year. In considering these numbers, some factors must be noted: • The surgeons perform a range of other procedures related to by-pass surgery; and • Many consultant surgeons are only engaged on a part time basis. They may work across the public and private sector and may therefore perform many more procedures per annum than this average indicates. (d) The National Demonstration Hospital Program does (NDHP) not provide cost or service/consultant workload figures benchmarked to national averages. There is some literature around workloads that go back further in time than the NDHP which finished in 2003. Some of the information is provided below. It must be noted that these statistics cover work in both the public and private sectors. The 1998 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare medical labour force survey results show that the average hours worked by cardiothoracic surgeons in WA was 60.7 hours per week, which was lower than the national average of 64.1 hours per week. Results ranged from a high of 73.5 hours per week in New South Wales to 50.6 hours per week in Queensland (Source — The cardiothoracic surgery workforce in Australia: Supply and Requirements 2000-2011). The Australian Medical Workforce Advisory Committee Survey of the Cardiothoracic Surgery Workforce: 2000, shows that the average number of coronary artery bypass procedures performed per year per surgeon for WA was 207 procedures, which was lower than the national average of 211 procedures. Results ranged from 171 in Victoria/Tasmania to 254 in New South Wales/Australian Capital Territory. (Source — The cardiothoracic surgery workforce in Australia: Supply and Requirements 2000–2011).

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5115

SOUTH HEDLAND FIRE AND RESCUE STATION — EXTENSION 3105. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Emergency Services Regarding the proposed extension to the South Hedland Fire & Rescue, will the Minister advise when funds will be allocated for the expansion and upgrade of the South Hedland Fire and Rescue Station facilities to accommodate the necessary training activities, to cater for the recruitment of volunteers, and to service the rapidly growing population of South Hedland? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: FESA has allocated $40,000 for modifications to the Station Keeper's quarters which will provide a dedicated breathing apparatus servicing facility, a training room and a small gymnasium. The works are nearing completion.

PATJARR COMMUNITY — ARTIST OPPORTUNITIES 3106. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Tourism (1) What opportunities within the tourism portfolio are available for linking the Patjarr Community, and, in particular, its many established and developing artists and especially its young artists, to the tourism market? (2) What funding programs are available through the Minister’s portfolio to assist the Patjarr Community with developing opportunities for training and employment in the tourism industry? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (1) Tourism Western Australia's role is to brand and promote Western Australia as a desirable holiday destination. Marketing opportunities for tourism operators with commercial product are provided by Tourism Western Australia, the Western Australian Indigenous Tourism Operators Committee (WAITOC) and Regional Tourism Organisations. These opportunities are promoted via regional online communications. The Patjarr Community is in the jurisdiction of the Australia's Golden Outback Regional Tourism Organisation (AGO RTO). Both WAITOC and the AGO RTO implement a number of marketing activities, collateral and on-line programs that tourism operators and communities can participate in. (2) Tourism Western Australia does not offer funding programs for training and employment in the tourism industry.

PORT HEDLAND — SEWERAGE PONDS RELOCATION 3107. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Lands Regarding the planned relocation of sewerage ponds in Port Hedland, will the Minister advise: (a) what process has been put in place for attracting a private investor to undertake the relocation of the sewerage ponds from Port Hedland; (b) what timelines apply and what funds have been allocated to attract a private investor to undertake this project; and (c) will the Government proceed with wholly funding this project if a private developer does not come forward; and (i) if not, why not? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) LandCorp is undertaking a due diligence study on likely costs of relocation of the Wastewater Treatment Plant and the potential land development outcomes that relocation will achieve. The outcomes of the due diligence study are aimed at identifying the financial and non financial impacts of all options and to provide developers with certainty for the reuse of the site. (b) The study is nearing completion and meetings with key stakeholders will be held to progress the findings of the report so that a timeline can be established and any required funds to finalise the assessment of options can be allocated. (c) The stakeholders will be discussing a range of issues including funding proposals which will be referred to my department for consideration. (i) Refer to (c) above.

5116 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

HOUSEHOLD FEES AND CHARGES — IMPACT 3108. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer (1) What is the nominal dollar impact on the representative household as a result of tariffs, fees and charges for all years between, and including, 1992–1993 to 2010–2011? (2) In relation to each year referred to at (1) above, what is the real dollar impact on the representative household in 2010–2011 terms? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(2) Household Expenditure Impacts 1992-93 to 2010-11 Nominal Expenditure Real Expenditure 1992-93 $2,492.58 $4,099.72 1993-94 $2,643.80 $4,256.27 1994-95 $2,753.34 $4,282.63 1995-96 $2,847.02 $4,261.37 1996-97 $2,746.47 $4,055.27 1997-98 $2,880.40 $4,263.84 1998-99 $3,037.70 $4,418.07 1999-2000 $3,095.67 $4,399.80 2000-01 $3,258.61 $4,391.96 2001-02 $3,326.67 $4,365.82 2002-03 $3,409.53 $4,353.51 2003-04 $3,484.38 $4,359.85 2004-05 $3,522.63 $4,273.03 2005-06 $3,436.62 $3,998.61 2006-07 $3,470.73 $3,884.97 2007-08 $3,601.35 $3,890.33 2008-09 $3,702.28 $3,881.73 2009-10 $4,059.89 $4,171.54 2010-11 $4,427.76 $4,427.76 Total Increase $ $1,935.18 $328.04 Total Increase % 77.64% 8.00% Note: Real dollar impact on the 'representative household' has been calculated using historical Perth Consumer Price Index levels with 2010-11set as the base year. As the Member would be aware, as a result of the inaction of the previous Labor Government and the botched break-up of Western Power, the Government was forced to make the tough decision to significantly increase electricity prices over the last two years. In addition, in recognition of the increasing cost of sourcing and supplying water, the Government has also supported the ERA's recommendation to increase water consumption charges while reducing the fixed water supply charge. The Government recognises that that these tough decisions have increased the cost of household bills and caused hardship for some. To help those in need the Government has introduced the Seniors Cost of Living Rebate and also significantly increased funding for rebates and hardship assistance measures. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3109. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Premier’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Departmental records, including State archives, are managed by the department in accordance with the State Records Act 2000. Prior to that Act, the management of departmental records was controlled under the Library

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5117

Board Act 1951. Under neither Acts does it stipulate the need to record the three dimensional space occupied by State Archives and as such, that information is not readily available.

PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3110. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109.

PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3111. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109.

PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3112. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109.

PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3113. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Education; Tourism In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109.

5118 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3114. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly question on notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3115. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3116. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3117. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3118. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5119

(a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3119. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Attorney General’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3120. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3121. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Water; Mental Health In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109.. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3122. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and

5120 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3123. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109.. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3124. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3125. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer In relation to archives and record-keeping in every agency and department within the Minister’s portfolio, I ask: (a) what is the volume of state archives currently held in: (i) private sector storage facilities; and (ii) government agencies awaiting transfer to the State Records Office; and (b) what is the annual cost to agencies and departments of private sector storage provision for state archives awaiting transfer to the State Records Office? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3109. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3126. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Premier’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Premier’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced;

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5121

(d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Premier is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Premier’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Departmental records are retained, archived or destroyed in accordance with the State Records Act 2000. Prior to that Act, the procedure for retention, archival and destruction was controlled under the Library Board Act 1951. Every effort is made to provide the relevant information, where reasonable, to the wide-ranging and broad scope of questions received by Ministers. Please refer to answers to original questions. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3127. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Deputy Premier’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Deputy Premier’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Deputy Premier is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3128. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3129. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask:

5122 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3130. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Education; Tourism In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3131. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr M.J. COWPER replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly question on notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3132. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5123

(a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3133. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3134. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126.

5124 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3135. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3136. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Attorney General’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Attorney General’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Attorney General is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Attorney General’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr C.C. PORTER replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3137. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5125

(e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3138. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Water; Mental Health In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3139. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3140. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced;

5126 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3141. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — ARCHIVES AND RECORDS STORAGE 3142. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer In regard to my previous question pertaining to private sector records management services inclusive of file retrieval and records storage costs for all departments and agencies, I ask: (a) why has information on all agencies and departments listed officially at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ not been included in the Minister’s answer; (b) which agencies, according to the list of government agencies at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/, use private sector records management services but have not been included in the figures supplied; (c) was the Minister’s original response inclusive of all government agencies or only agencies for which information could be readily sourced; (d) please detail the complete answer for every agency and department and list any agency department found at http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ for which the Minister is unable to provide full information; and (e) if information at the whole-of-government records site http://wa.gov.au/agencies/ does not include agencies or departments within the Minister’s portfolio, please explain why and list the answer separately. Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3126. PUBLIC SECTOR — SUPPORT FOR ICLEI OCEANIA 3143. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Water What is the nature of financial, and other, support that agencies in the Minister’s portfolio are providing to ICLEI Oceania, the regional secretariat for ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: The Department of Water is currently providing ICLEI Oceania with $500 000 over 2009-10 and 2010-11. This consists of $400 000 to provide support to ICLEI's Water Campaign in Western Australia and $100, 000 to

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5127 provide support for the Waterwise Council campaign (a partnership between Water Corporation, Department of Water and ICLEI). In addition to this funding, the Water Corporation has made a one off contribution to the ICLEI Oceania of $30 000 in May 2009 to assist with the funding of the Water Campaign in Western Australia to enable its ongoing involvement in the Waterwise Council Program. The Water Corporation continues to provide other support to ICLEI Oceania for the Water Campaign including the promotion of the logo featured on the Corporation's website, Waterwise promotional materials and at Waterwise events. NAMBEELUP PROPERTY — LAND TAX 3145. Mr M.J. Cowper to the Treasurer (1) Please advise what land tax has been paid on Lot 81 Gull Road, Nambeelup, in the Murray Shire between 1988 and 1998. (2) Has the land tax on the property mentioned at (1) been paid; and (a) if so, by whom; and (b) if not, why not? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(2) Section 114 of the Taxation Administration Act 2003 imposes a duty of confidentiality on the Commissioner of State Revenue and prevents him from disclosing information obtained under a Taxation Act.

POLICE ACCOMMODATION — MARBLE BAR 3147. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Police In reference to housing for the police officer in charge at Marble Bar: (a) is the Minister aware that the officer in charge at Marble Bar lives in a small transportable dwelling which was due for replacement in 2008; (b) what accommodation alternatives have been planned for this officer in charge; (c) what funds have been allocated to replace this dwelling; (d) when will this dwelling be replaced; and (e) what housing plans are in place to ensure that all police officers in Marble Bar, Hedland, Newman and Karratha are adequately housed? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: (a) Yes. Police identified the OIC quarters at Marble Bar as requiring replacement in its 2008/09 annual submission to Government Regional Officers Housing (GROH). (b) Replacement of the property once funding is identified by GROH. (c)-(d) This is not under the agency's jurisdiction. Please refer to the Minister for Housing. (e) Police officers in Regional WA are provided with quality housing by GROH. Where housing standards fall below expectations WA Police work with GROH to improve housing standards as quickly as possible, working within funding and timeframe constraints associated with the delivery of housing and conflicting demands from other government agencies. POLICE ACCOMMODATION — MARBLE BAR 3148. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Housing In reference to housing for police officers in the Pilbara: (a) is the Minister aware that the officer in charge at Marble Bar lives in a small transportable dwelling which was due for replacement in 2008; (b) what accommodation alternatives have been planned for this officer in charge; (c) what funds have been allocated to replace this dwelling; (d) when will this dwelling be replaced; and (e) what housing plans are in place to ensure that all police officers in Marble Bar, Hedland, Newman and Karratha are adequately housed?

5128 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) In 2007/2008, the Department of Housing earmarked this property for replacement within 5 years. (b) The property is scheduled for replacement in the Department's 2011/2012 building program. (c) $650,000 (d) Please refer to (b). (e) The Government has invested heavily in the provision of housing for Government officers in the Pilbara. The Department of Housing has a current portfolio of 1272 properties across Pilbara towns allocated to Government officers. A further 117 properties will be delivered within the next 18 months at a cost of $70.2 million and a proportion of these will be provided to WA Police. The Department's commitment in the Pilbara region represents the largest portfolio of Government officers' housing stock in the State. PATJARR COMMUNITY — SCHOOL OF THE AIR TRANSITION 3149. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Education In reference to the education of the ten school-age children at the Patjarr Community: (a) what funding has been allocated for the employment of a School of the Air education assistant for the Patjarr community; (b) is this position full-time; and (i) if not, why not; (c) is accommodation to be provided for this assistant; and (i) if not, why not; (d) when will the internet, phone and fax lines be operational and available for the use of the school students doing School of the Air at the Patjarr community; (e) what number of students are now enrolled with School of the Air at the Patjarr community; and (f) when will all school-age children start to receive the necessary school materials to ensure their participation in School of the Air from Patjarr? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: As at 3 August 2010, there are only six school-age children in the community. (a) $31 110. (b) Yes. (i) Not applicable. (c) Yes. (i) Not applicable. (d) The School of the Air has a Memorandum of Understanding with the service provider Ngaanyatjarra Media. They have informed the community that it is anticipated that a team of technicians will visit the community during August (as yet no date has been confirmed). (e) There are only six school-age children in the community as at 2 July 2010. Four children are enrolled at the School of the Air and two at the School of Isolated and Distance Education. (f) School of the Air materials have already been provided. The children have print and electronic materials on CD for the education assistant to implement according to the program developed by the teacher. BELLARY ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY — FENCING ISSUE 3150. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Housing In reference to fencing of the Injie family home at Bellary Springs: (a) how many homes remain unfenced at the Bellary aboriginal community near Paraburdoo; (b) under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, is the provision of a fence one means of addressing poor housing conditions to achieve improvements in indigenous health; and (c) can the Minister guarantee that an unfenced yard is a safe place for a young family; and (i) if not, will the Minister make funds available to address this situation?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5129

Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (a) Two. (b) Yes Under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing the Department as a general rule complies with the National Indigenous Housing Guide which recommends the installation of fencing to new houses. (c) A Departmental representative is scheduled to contact the Injie family to discuss fencing alternatives at the property and funding options. CYCLIST SAFETY ISSUE — CAMP ROAD, PARABURDOO 3151. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Transport Further to the answer to Question Without Notice No. 1494 (of which some notice was given), can the Minister advise: (a) what is the basis of the claim that the cattle grid previously on the Camp Road approach to Paraburdoo was a safety issue for local cyclists; (b) is the Minister aware that local cyclists more regularly use the Tom Price Road or the Mine Road routes, both of which do have cattle grids on them and a foot of sheeting either side for cyclists’ use; (c) is the Minister aware that a local ambulance officer has advised that, to the best of his knowledge, in the past 10 years there have been no injuries to cyclists due to cattle grids; (d) further, is the Minister aware that local pastoral leaseholder have tried painted lines and advise that these have proved very ineffective as young calves walk through and the bigger animals simply follow; and (e) if the Minister is still determined to trial the white lines, how many months will locals have to wait for this imitation cattle grid to be, firstly, painted and then, secondly, tested? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: (a)-c) Following a customer complaint, Main Roads undertook an assessment of the cattle grid and concluded it was beyond servicing. It was subsequently removed on safety grounds. (d) Main Roads has used painted grids successfully in other locations. (e) The trial painted grid was installed on Monday, 19 July 2010. Main Roads' trial of the newly painted cattle grid will commence on receipt of confirmation from the Shire of Ashburton that all other issues associated with other possible accesses in Paraburdoo town used by the cattle have been addressed satisfactorily. The trial will then be put in place for a period of 12 months. PUBLIC HOUSING — HIGH-VALUE PROPERTIES 3152. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Housing I refer to the 100 or so Department of Housing properties identified as being valued at $1 million or over and ask: (a) in which suburbs are these properties located; (b) how many of these properties are in each of these suburbs; (c) what is the size of the land on which each of the properties is situated; and (d) what are each of the properties zoned? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (a)-(b) The Department currently has properties identified as being valued at $1 million or over in the following suburbs: Bedford 7 Claremont 7 East Fremantle 3 Mosman Park 23

5130 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mount Claremont 21 South Perth 3 Subiaco 1 Swanbourne 3 Wembley Downs 1 Total 69 (c) The properties sit on varying sized lots with the range and average provided below: Bedford 1213m2 to 1230 m2 average 1225 m2 Claremont 772m2 to 785 m2 average 777 m2 East Fremantle 663m2 to 892 m2 average 739 m2 Mosman Park 636m2 to 967 m2 average 740 m2 Mount Claremont 688m2 to 1011 m2 average 899 m2 South Perth 718m2 to 859 m2 average 796 m2 Subiaco 976m2 Swanbourne 719m2 to 939 m2 average 801 m2 Wembley Downs 1011m2 (d) As with the lot sizes, zoning varies within each suburb. The current zonings applicable to the properties identified are as follows: Bedford R20/25 Claremont R25 East Fremantle R20 Mosman Park R15, R17.5, R20 Mount Claremont R10/20, R12.5, R25 South Perth R15 Subiaco R20 Swanbourne R15, R20 Wembley Downs R20

PUBLIC HOUSING — WAIT LIST, JUNE 2010 3153. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Housing I refer to the 53,473 people associated with the wait for public housing as at 1 March 2010, and ask, what is the number of people associated with the wait as of 1 June 2010? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: 54,125. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING — FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT EMPLOYEES 3154. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Housing (1) Did the Department of Housing provide details of the number of full-time equivalents (FTEs) of the Department in the 2010–2011 Budget Papers; and (a) if not, why not? (2) As at 1 June 2010, what is the overall number of Department of Housing employees? (3) As at 30 June 2009, what was the overall number of Department of Housing employees? (4) How many Level 8 staff and above are employed with the Department as at 1 June 2010? (5) How many staff are employed in the following areas as at 1 June 2010: (a) rental housing; (b) home loans; (c) land; and (d) Government Regional Officers’ Housing (GROH)? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5131

(1) No (a) The Housing Authority is classified as a Public Non- Financial Corporation and is outside the General Government sector for FTE reporting purposes in the Budget papers. However, the Department reports its FTE number in its annual report. (2) 1198 (3) 1135 (4) 69 (5) (a) 747 (b) Home loan staff are employed by Keystart (c) 60 (d) 22 PUBLIC HOUSING — WAIT LIST, JUNE 2010 3155. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Housing I refer to the wait list for Department of Housing accommodation, and ask: (a) could the Minister advise the number of applicants on the wait list for Department of Housing accommodation as of 1 June 2010; (b) could the Minister advise the number of children and dependants associated with applicants on the wait list for Department of Housing accommodation per district as of 1 June 2010; (c) could the Minister advise the number of applicants on the priority housing wait list per district as of 1 June 2010; and (d) could the Minister advise the number of children and dependants associated with applicants on the priority housing wait list per district as of 1 June 2010? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (a) As at 1 June 2010 there were 24,077 applications on the waiting list. (b) Children and dependents on waitlist per district (as at 1 June 2010): Metro North 9782 Metro Fremantle 3097 Metro South East 5296 Southern 569 South West 1458 Goldfields 388 Mid West/Gascoyne 1166 Pilbara 850 Kimberley 1479 Wheatbelt 303 (The figures above consist of children which includes dependent children, adult non dependent children and shared custody children). (c) Priority Wait list by application per district (as at 1 June 2010): Metro North 1699 Metro Fremantle 660 Metro South East 537 Southern 124 South West 66 Goldfields 30 Mid West/Gascoyne 125 Pilbara 140 Kimberley 245 Wheatbelt 31 (d) Children and dependents on priority waitlist per district (as at 1 June 2010): Metro North 2019 Metro Fremantle 647

5132 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Metro South East 614 Southern 133 South West 89 Goldfields 36 Mid West/Gascoyne 220 Pilbara 229 Kimberley 341 Wheatbelt 46 (The figures above consist of children which includes dependent children, adult non dependent children and shared custody children).

ROYALTIES FOR REGION FUND — ADMINISTRATION COST 3156. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the 2010–2011 State Budget line item on page 257 which refers to administering the royalties for region fund, and I ask: (a) what particular service(s) will be paid for from this allocation; and (b) how many staff will be employed administering the fund? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) The Royalties for Regions program is administered through the Department of Regional Development and Lands. In this regard, the role of the Department is to: • Develop and implement frameworks to manage Royalties for Regions funds and ensure the accountable implementation of agreed outcomes; • Develop and maintain reporting mechanisms to capture information on the progress and outcomes of the Royalties for Regions initiatives; • Co-ordinate activity associated with implementing the Royalties for Regions program and associated projects; • Co-ordinate and administer the budget for the Royalties for Regions fund including preparation of documentation for the Department of Treasury and Finance, and Cabinet; and • Provide the Western Australian Regional Development Trust with services and facilities pursuant to the Royalties for Regions Act 2009. (b) Currently 22 staff are directly involved with the administration of the Royalties for Regions fund. An additional officer is directly involved in providing services to the Trust. EXECUTIVE SUPPORT — BUDGET ALLOCATION 3157. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the statement in the 2010–2011 State Budget concerning executive support on page 262, which then refers to page 263, and ask: (a) what proportion of the $9.722 million in other expenses (page 263) is allocated to executive support; and (b) what are the details of executive support expenditure; and (i) is this for support of the Department’s executive, support to the Minister, or both; and (ii) what form does this support take; and (A) if it is in the form of staffing, how many full-time equivalents; and (B) if it is in the form of office accommodation, what are the details of location and cost? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) The $9.722 million includes an allocation of $1.621 million for executive support. (b) (i) It reflects the cost of Corporate Services required to support the Lands function of the Department as allocated by the previous Department for Planning and Infrastructure. (ii) Executive support refers to the provision of Human Resources, Finance, Corporate Communications and Information Technology support.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5133

(A) Nil Executive Support is budgeted for 2010/11 as a payment to the Department of Planning who currently hold the FTE allocation. The process for splitting the FTEs in Corporate Services with the Departments of Planning and Transport is currently being finalised. (B) There was no direct allocation for office accommodation for executive support staff. 21ST CENTURY PROGRAM — SCIENCE AND LANGUAGE CENTRES 3158. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Education I refer to the science and language centres for the 21st Century programme, and ask: (a) what are the names of the people who sat on the panel assessing applications for the programme; (b) which schools’ applications were unsuccessful; (c) which of the successful schools have had cost overruns in the construction of their science or language centre, and what is the amount of each cost overrun; (d) which of the successful schools have science and language centres fully operational as at 1 June 2010; and (e) at which schools is construction or outfitting still underway? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) The Department of Education's internal assessment panel which undertook the initial short listing comprised:- Ms Clare Buising Ms Linley Kemeny Ms Ruth Kempton Mr Stan Koios Mr Malcolm Parr Mr Julius Robertson All compliant applications were then assessed by a national assessment panel established by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations and recommendations were forwarded to the Federal Minister for Education for final decision. The national assessment panel comprised:- Ms Gillian Mitchell, Branch Manager, Building the Education Revolution, Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Reltations, Canberra. Mr Andrew Blair, President, Australian Secondary Principals Association Inc. Professor Angela Scarino, University of South Australia Dr James Peacock AC, CSIRO Fellow Mr Steve Carter, President, Australian Council of State School Organisations Mr Bill Daniels, Executive Director, Independent Schools Council of Australia (b) The following applications from public schools in Western Australia were not successful in attracting funding: Applecross Senior High School Australind Senior High School Bruce Rock District High School Como Secondary College Cyril Jackson Senior Campus Denmark High School Duncraig Senior High School Eastern Hills Senior High School Gnowangerup District High School John Curtin College of the Arts Kent Street Senior High School Leonora District High School Lesmurdie Senior High School Lockridge Senior High School Manjimup Senior High School

5134 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mount Lawley Senior High School Newton Moore Senior High School North Lake Senior Campus Perth Modern School Rockingham Senior High School Rossmoyne Senior High School Safety Bay Senior High School South Fremantle Senior High School Thornlie Senior High School Western Australian College of Education (Cunderdin) Willetton Senior High School

(c) Of the completed projects as at 1 June 2010, none had a cost overrun. (d) Cecil Andrews Senior High School. (e) The projects at the following schools were still in progress as at 1 June 2010: Armadale Senior High School Balga Senior High School Bridgetown High School Broome Senior High School Bunbury Senior High School Busselton Senior High School Esperance Senior High School Geraldton Senior College Girrawheen Senior High School Hamilton Senior High School Hampton Senior High School Harvey Senior High School John Forrest Senior High School John Willcock College Katanning Senior High School Mirrabooka Senior High School Morley Senior High School Newman Senior High School Pinjarra Senior High School Swan View Senior High School Toodyay District High School Warwick Senior High School Yanchep District High School Yule Brook College.

2011 COMMONWEALTH HEADS OF GOVERNMENT MEETING — ARRANGEMENTS 3159. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier I refer to the allocation of monies towards the 2011 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) and royal visit, and ask: (a) for what specific purposes has the money been allocated; (b) how many staff are working directly on arrangements for CHOGM and the royal visit, and what are their levels and salaries; and (c) who is overseeing the project since the departure of Ms Deidre Willmott? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises: (a) Funding provided by Government will support a program of work that will promote the State and help the Western Australian community and Western Australian businesses to participate in CHOGM 2011 activities.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5135

The Western Australian CHOGM Steering Committee will consider how Western Australia's CHOGM objectives can best be achieved and will consider supporting a number of initiatives, these may include: - grants to local governments, schools and non-government organisations to manage Commonwealth-themed events and activities; - support for the Commonwealth Business, Youth and People's Forums; - a cultural and artistic program and - a possible Commonwealth-themed sporting fixtures. There will be some costs met by the Western Australian Government in relation to the Royal Visit. An estimation of costs involved will not be known until both the visit and the approved inclusions are confirmed. Major areas of costs may include, advanced site planning, State Reception and consultants. A cost sharing agreement is being negotiated between the Commonwealth and State Governments. (b)-(c) Premier will be announcing the appointment of the CHOGM State Director and other arrangements around the State's involvement in CHOGM as soon as Parliament reconvenes. The following officers are currently working directly on arrangements for CHOGM. Position Level Salary CHOGM State Director To be advised To be advised Assistant Director General (CHOGM Coordinator)* Group 2 Min $199,528 Principal Project Officer* Level 7.1 $95,301 Project Officer Level 4.1 $62,959 Chief of Protocol* Level 8.3 $117,441 Assistant Manager* Level 6.1 $81,501 Senior Protocol Officer* Level 5.4 $77,405 Executive Assistant* Level 3.3 $59,065 * indicates the officer undertakes other duties in addition to CHOGM planning. The information above does not include Western Australian Police officers undertaking security planning for the event as it is expected that security related costs will be met by the Australian Government.

LIVING LAKES PROJECT — WHEATBELT TOWNS 3160. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the Living Lakes project listed on page 264 of the 2010–2011 State Budget papers, and I ask which specific Wheatbelt towns are being considered within the feasibility and planning stages? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The Department of Regional Development and Lands is in the initial stages of developing documentation to call for Expressions of Interest (EOI) from proponents wishing to undertake the Living Lakes Feasibility Study. The lakes to be the subject of the study are yet to be determined and will be done so as part of the EOI process..

NGARHUMA ABORIGINAL SUSTAINABLE HOUSING — CONSULTANT FUNDING 3161. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the delivery of $5 million to the Ngarluma Aboriginal Sustainable Housing (NASH) project, and ask: (a) is it the case that $500,000 of this $5 million amount will be provided to a consultant in relation to the NASH project; (i) if not, how much are the consultancy fees; (b) what services will the consultant provide as part of this payment; and (c) has a consultant been appointed; and (i) if yes, what is the name of the person or company awarded the consultancy contract? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) Yes, up to $500,000 has been provided to the Department of Treasury and Finance to engage an independent consultant. (i) Not applicable.

5136 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) The independent consultant has been engaged to conduct a due diligence review of the proposed Stage 1 of the NASH project. This will involve detailed project implementation planning in order to more accurately determine the estimated costs of the project. This includes detailed engineering and surveying services investigations including onsite geo-technical investigations, traffic, landscaping, acoustic and heritage studies as well as liaison with local and state government planning and services authorities. (c) Yes. (i) NS Projects. COUNTRY LOCAL GOVERNMENT FUND — ACQUITTALS 3162. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the allocation of monies through the 2008–2009 Country Local Government Fund, and ask: (a) have all local governments provided final acquittals for funds received; and (i) if not, how many are outstanding; and (b) what are the names of the individual local governments and individual projects for which acquittals have not been received for the 2008–2009 allocation? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) No. (i) There are 104 local governments that are yet to submit their final acquittals. Local governments are not required to submit acquittals for individual projects. The majority of local governments are undertaking more than one project through their Country Local Government Fund allocation and will submit acquittals at the completion of all projects. (b) Local governments that have submitted acquittals are the City of Albany, the Shire of Cuballing, the Shire of Harvey, the Shire of Jerramungup, the Shire of Roebourne and the Shire of Sandstone. All other local governments that received Country Local Government Funds in 2008-09 are yet to submit their 2008-09 acquittals. COUNTRY LOCAL GOVERNMENT FUND — PROJECT TENDER PROCESS 3163. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development (1) Are local governments required to guarantee that a competitive tender process is conducted for all projects funded through the allocation of monies via the Country Local Government Fund; and (a) if not, why not? (2) Can the Minister guarantee that local governments that received monies through the 2008–2009 Country Local Government Fund used a competitive tendering process for all projects funded through the scheme; and (a) if not, why not? (3) For which projects was a competitive tender process not conducted? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (1)-(3) Local governments are not required to report whether a competitive tender process has been conducted for all Country Local Government Fund projects. Local governments are regulated under the Local Government Act 1995. This Act dictates when tenders are required and local governments are to adhere to this Act when implementing all projects undertaken. Local governments are required to call for tenders for the provision of goods and services where the consideration is expected to be more or worth more than $100 000. Each local government is required, under the Act, to have a purchasing policy and each local government sets its own criteria for how purchasing operates under the tender requirements. ROYALTIES FOR REGIONS PROGRAM — MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING 3164. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the 2009 Auditor General’s report regarding a Preliminary Examination of the Royalties for Regions Programme and the recommendation that all outstanding Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) at the time be agreed and signed as a matter of priority, and I ask:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5137

(a) have all outstanding MOUs been signed; and (a) if not, why not; and (b) which MOUs have not been signed? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) All MOUs which were outstanding at the time of the 2009 Auditor General's Report have now been signed. (i) Not applicable. (b) Not applicable. SCHOOL EDUCATION ACT — COMPULSORY STARTING AGE 3165. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Education In relation to section 11(1)(a) of the School Education Act 1999, I ask: (a) on how many occasions has the Minister exempted a child from the compulsory starting age; (b) what reasons has the Minister given for agreeing to this; (c) how many requests to exempt a child has the Minster rejected; and (d) what reasons has the Minister given for refusing to exempt? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) Nil. (b) Not applicable. (c) Nil. (d) Not applicable. PREMIER'S OFFICE — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3167. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development I refer to placement officers working in the Premier’s office, and ask: (a) could the Premier provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Premier advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010.

DEPUTY PREMIER'S OFFICE — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3168. Mr M. McGowan to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs I refer to placement officers working in the Deputy Premier’s office, and ask: (a) could the Deputy Premier provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Deputy Premier advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer?

5138 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Dr K.D. HAMES replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3169. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3170. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3171. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Education; Tourism I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5139

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3172. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report, which will be made available from August 2010.. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3173. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3174. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3175. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask:

5140 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3176. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3177. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services I refer to placement officers working in the Attorney General’s office, and ask: (a) could the Attorney General provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Attorney General advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3178. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement;

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5141

(d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3179. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Water; Mental Health I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3180. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3181. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer?

5142 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3182. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — PUBLIC SECTOR STAFF 3183. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer I refer to placement officers working in the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) could the Minister provide the names of all public sector agency staff placed in his Ministerial Office, as at 1 June 2010; (b) from which agency is the placed officer; (c) could the Minister advise the nature of the work being undertaken by the placement; (d) what is the title of the officer in the agency from which he or she is placed; (e) which agency pays the salary of the placed officer; and (f) what is the salary of the placed officer? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Member would be aware that a Ministerial Resourcing Report will be tabled quarterly as part of the Liberal- National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. I would refer the Member to this Resourcing Report which will be made available from August 2010. PREMIER'S OFFICE STAFF — ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS 3184. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier I refer to the attendance of Premier’s office staff at inter-government agency or inter-ministerial office meetings, and ask: (a) are there regular (that is, weekly, fortnightly or monthly) inter-government agency or inter-ministerial Office meetings which a member of the Premier’s Ministerial staff attends in a formal or informal capacity; and (i) if yes, what is the name of the Ministerial officer who attends these regular meetings; (ii) if yes, what are the names of all people who attended the last two of these inter-government agency or inter-ministerial office meetings; and (iii) if yes, does this regular meeting have a name; and (A) if so, what is its name; (b) what is the purpose of these regular meetings; and (c) are records of these meetings kept?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5143

Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Premier's Office advises: (a)-(c) Staff attend both inter-governmental and inter-ministerial meetings regularly in a formal and informal capacity.

DEIDRE WILLMOTT — RESIGNATION PAYMENT 3185. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier I refer to the resignation of the Premier’s former Chief of Staff, Ms Deidre Willmott, and ask: (a) did Ms Willmott receive any payment upon her resignation; (b) if yes, what were the payments for; (c) if yes, how much was paid; and (d) if yes, what are the categories of each payment? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises: (a) Yes (b) Accrued leave entitlements (c) $2,905.53 (d) Annual Leave — $2,905.53

MINISTERIAL STAFF — ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS 3186. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the attendance of Ministerial office staff at inter-government agency or inter-ministerial office meetings, and ask: (a) are there regular (that is, weekly, fortnightly or monthly) inter-government agency or inter-ministerial office meetings which a member of the Minister’s Ministerial staff attends in a formal or informal capacity; and (i) if yes, what is the name of the Ministerial officer who attends these regular meetings; (ii) if yes, what are the names of all people who attended the last two of these inter-government agency or inter-ministerial office meetings; and (iii) if yes, does this regular meeting have a name; and (A) if so, what is its name; (b) what is the purpose of these regular meetings; and (c) are records of these meetings kept? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) Yes (i) (1) Doug Cunningham (2) Jill Sounness (ii) (1) Sub Committee of Cabinet (2) Paul Rosair, Gail McGowan, Jaci Moore, Charles Kretzmann, Terry Hill, Mike Maloney, Mark Pasalich, Patrick Walker, Peter Stubbs, Elena Leslie, Scott Mitchell, Phil Pickering and Jill Sounness (iii) Yes (1) Ministerial Taskforce on Approvals, Development and Sustainability (2) Ord Director General Steering Committee (b) (1) Improve processes on Approvals Development and Sustainability. (2) Update Stakeholder Agencies on the progress of the Ord-East Kimberley Expansion project. (c) Yes

5144 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

POLICE — METROPOLITAN ASSET STRATEGY 3187. Mr M. McGowan to the Treasurer I refer to the development of a business case for the Western Australian Police Metropolitan Asset Strategy to identify where future police stations should be located across the Perth metropolitan area, and I ask: (a) has this business case been completed; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if so, will the Treasurer table the business case; and (i) if not, why not? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: The Police Metropolitan Asset Strategy has been completed to plan the future requirements of the Western Australia Police, as is required under the State's Strategic Asset Management Framework. This strategy will provide guidance to and form the basis of development of individual business cases addressing individual asset requirements. PARLIAMENTARY PRECINCT STEERING COMMITTEE — PRIVATE SECTOR REPRESENTATION 3188. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier I refer to the State Government’s Parliamentary Precinct Steering Committee, and ask: (a) how was it decided to include private sector representation on the Committee; (b) who made the decision to include private sector representation; (c) how were Hawaiian and Stuart Hicks Management Pty Ltd selected to be included on the Committee; (d) were other private sector organisations contacted regarding representation on the Committee; and (i) if not, why not; and (e) have Hawaiian or Stuart Hicks Management Pty Ltd signed any confidentiality agreements in relation to their representation on the Committee? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Department of Treasury and Finance Answer (a) Steve Woodland, Government Architect met with the President of Legislative Council and Speaker of the Legislative Assembly (Hon Barry House & Hon Grant Woodhams ) to discuss the establishment of the Parliamentary Precinct Steering Committee in December 2009 at the suggestion of the Treasurer. The Government Architect developed the proposed membership of the Committee and this was endorsed by the Executive Director of Building Management and Works, prior to the Treasurer recommending approval of proposed membership and terms of reference of the Steering Committee to the Premier, via a letter dated 16 March 2010. (b) The membership of the Committee was proposed by the Government Architect after discussion with senior Departmental, Government and Parliamentary representatives. The structure of the committee incorporated a range of disciplines including planning, heritage, tourism, commercial property, Government accommodation, Parliamentary accommodation and Local Government. (c) It was jointly agreed there would be merit in including private sector representation on the Committee to enable access to a range of expertise with the planning, funding and delivery of large scale infrastructure projects and that due consideration of issues of commerciality be properly explored by the Committee in guiding and informing outcomes from the master planning process. Stuart Hicks was approached on the basis of his experience with the Northbridge Link and Perth Waterfront and other major urban infrastructure projects. Russell Gibbs of Hawaiian was approached as a high profile member of the development industry with strong experience in commercial property in the city. (d) No. This was the case due to the need for confidentiality. (e) The Steering Committee has been formally directed regarding the project's confidentiality. Steve Woodland, Government Architect and Chair of the Steering Committee issued correspondence to this effect to all Steering Committee members on 2 June 2010.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5145

CAPITAL WORKS PROJECTS — COST 3189. Mr M. McGowan to the Treasurer I refer to the range of significant capitals works projects overseen by Building Management and Works, and ask the Treasurer if he could advise the actual final cost, or current estimated final cost, for each of the following projects: (a) Karratha Primary School; (b) Ellenbrook Secondary College; (c) Clarkson Trade Training Centre; (d) Comet Bay College (Stage 2); (e) King Edward Memorial Hospital (Neonatal Expansion); (f) Roseworth Primary School; (g) Greenwood Primary School; (h) Police Specialist Training Facility; and (i) Kings Park (Ceremonial Walks). Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Most projects are State funded. Several projects have also received Federal "Building the Education Revolution" (BER) funding. (a) Project is under construction. $22,165,000 Estimated final cost. (b) Project is under construction. $22,300,000 Estimated final cost. (c) Project is at tender. $21,000,000 Estimated final cost. (d) Project is under construction. $18,210,000 Estimated final cost. (e) Project is under construction. $9,965,000 Estimated final cost. (f) Project is under construction. $11,996,500 Estimated final cost. (g) Project is under construction. $10,710,000 Estimated final cost. (h) Project is under construction. $8,204,718 Estimated final cost. (i) Main project works are complete. Final minor works are underway. $5,847,000 Estimated final cost.

STATE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE — ADVICE TO MINISTERS 3190. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General (1) Since 1 January 2010, has the State Solicitor’s Office been engaged to provide advice to Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries in relation to a freedom of information (FOI) application; and (i) if yes, what is the name of the Minister or Parliamentary Secretary for whom the State Solicitor’s Office was engaged to provide advice; and (ii) if yes, on what date was the request for this advice received by the State Solicitor’s Office? (2) Could the Attorney General provide a list of the FOI subject matters for which advice was sought? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (1) Yes. (i) See 'Minister' column in the table below. (ii) See 'Date of Request' column in the table below.

5146 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

MINISTER DATE OF REQUEST ATTORNEY GENERAL 10/03/2010 ATTORNEY GENERAL 22/04/2010 ATTORNEY GENERAL 10/05/2010 MINISTER FOR COMMERCE 17/02/2010 MINISTER FOR EDUCATION 10/03/2010 MINISTER FOR EDUCATION 20/05/2010 MINISTER FOR EDUCATION 05/01/2010 MINISTER FOR ENERGY 25/02/2010 MINISTER FOR ENERGY 10/03/2010 MINISTER FOR ENERGY 24/03/2010 MINISTER FOR ENERGY 27/05/2010 MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT 16/02/2010 MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT 04/02/2010 MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT 04/02/2010 MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT 02/02/2010 MINISTER FOR HEALTH 06/07/2010 MINISTER FOR HEALTH 21/05/2010 MINISTER FOR HEALTH 30/03/2010 MINISTER FOR HEALTH 02/03/2010 MINISTER FOR HEALTH 24/06/2010 PREMIER 06/04/2010 PREMIER 02/06/2010 PREMIER 23/04/2010 PREMIER 13/03/2010 PREMIER 01/07/2010 MINISTER FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT 20/05/2010 MINISTER FOR SENIORS & VOLUNTEERING 19/05/2010 MINISTER FOR TOURISM 18/01/2010 MINISTER FOR TOURISM 18/05/2010 MINISTER FOR TOURISM 18/06/2010 MINISTER FOR TRAINING 06/07/2010 MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT 14/04/2010 MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT 07/05/2010 MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT 31/05/2010 MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT 01/06/2010 MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT 07/05/2010 MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT 23/04/2010 MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT 13/04/2010 TREASURER 16/02/2010 TREASURER 08/02/2010 TREASURER 11/01/2010 TREASURER 01/07/2010 TREASURER 12/03/2010 MINISTER FOR WATER 06/07/2010 (2) The subject matter of each request for advice is subject to legal professional privilege.

PROFESSIONAL GYPROCK SOLUTIONS — OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES 3191. Mr F.M. Logan to the Minister for Commerce (1) Is the Minister aware of allegations of occupational health and safety breaches, underpayment of workers, evasion of payroll tax and employment of overseas workers without visas in the Western Australian operations of Professional Gyprock Solutions? (2) Is the Minister aware of investigations into the Western Australian operations of Professional Gyprock Solutions by the Australian Taxation Office, the Department of Immigration and the Australian Building and Construction Commission? (3) Given the level of interest of federal agencies, will the Minister commit the Department of Commerce to investigating the company for breaches of Western Australian legislation or regulations; and (a) if not, why not?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5147

(4) Will the Minister commit to WorkSafe investigating the company for alleged occupational health and safety issues; and (a) if not, why not; and (b) if this has occurred, can the Minister guarantee that the company is adhering to all relevant Western Australian occupational health and safety laws? (5) Has the Minister ever met with any representative of Professional Gyprock Solutions; and (a) if so, who attended the meeting and what was the topic of discussion? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (1) I have been advised that the WorkSafe division of the Department of Commerce had conducted an investigation involving a company called Professional Gyprock Solution Pty Ltd in relation to Occupational Safety and Health matters. (2) No. (3) The Department of Commerce will investigate any company in breach of WA legislations or regulations under its administration. (4) WorkSafe has conducted and concluded the investigation of this company. (a)-(b) Please refer to answer (4). (5) No. (a) N/A. PROFESSIONAL GYPROCK SOLUTIONS — OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES 3192. Mr F.M. Logan to the Commerce (1) Is the Premier aware of allegations of occupational health and safety breaches, underpayment of workers, evasion of payroll tax and employment of overseas workers without visas in the Western Australian operations of Professional Gyprock Solutions? (2) Is the Premier aware of investigations into the Western Australian operations of Professional Gyprock Solutions by the Australian Taxation Office, the Department of Immigration and the Australian Building and Construction Commission? (3) Given the level of interest of federal agencies will the Premier instruct the Minister for Commerce to order his Department to investigate the company for breaches of Western Australian legislation or regulations; and (a) if not, why not? (4) Will the Premier instruct the Minister for Commerce to order WorkSafe to investigate the company for alleged occupational health and safety issues; and (a) if not, why not; and (b) if this has occurred, can the Premier guarantee that the company is adhering to all relevant Western Australian occupational health and safety laws? (5) Has the Premier ever met with any representative of Professional Gyprock Solutions; and (a) if so, who attended the meeting and what was the topic of discussion? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (1)-(4) Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3191. (5) The Minister for Commerce cannot comment for the Premier. NORTHBRIDGE THEATRE 3193. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Culture and the Arts In relation to the Northbridge Theatre, I ask: (a) what is the cost of the Per Cent for Art component; (b) what is the current total cost of the building; (c) who were the short-listed artists for the project; and (d) who was the successful artist?

5148 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a) Total: $403 000. (b) Total construction cost of building is $72million. (c) Artist A — Geoffrey Drake — Brockman and Matthew Ngui. Artist B — No short list — Audrey and Arif Satar selected from all applicants. (d) Matthew Ngui. The percent for art installation by Mathew Ngui titled Comets, is an interactive light installation that celebrates the same principles of the building's architectural design and function. Audrey and Arif Satar. This project is a requirement of the Heritage Council of WA to interpret the cultural history of the site. FIONA STANLEY HOSPITAL — PER CENT FOR ART COMPONENT 3194. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Health In relation to the Fiona Stanley Hospital: (a) what is the budget allocated under Per Cent for Art obligations; (b) has the tender been let; and (c) to whom has it been let? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) $1.0 Million. The 'Percentage for Art' budget covers a number of individual artworks which is anticipated will be let to different Artists. (b) No contracts have been let at this stage. (c) Not applicable. PORT HEDLAND HOSPITAL — RADIOLOGISTS 3197. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Health Can the Minister advise: (a) how many radiologists are available to service the population of Port Hedland; (b) how often are services in the radiology department available at the Port Hedland Hospital; and (c) will this situation improve at the new Hedland Health Campus when it opens later this year? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a)-(b) Radiology services are provided on a contract for service basis at the Port Hedland Hospital and are available Monday to Friday from 0800 — 1630 for general cases and 24 hrs / 7 days per week for emergency cases. Medical imaging technologists are available 24/7 for imaging purposes. (c) The same service will be provided from the Hedland Health Campus. PILBARA WATER PLAN 3198. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Water (1) Has the Minister yet made himself aware of the costings for the Pilbara Water Plan that was produced last May; and (a) if yes, when; and (b) if not, why not? (2) Will the Minister provide information on where the $7.1 million allocated for the West Pilbara Water Security Program is to be spent, including a detailed list of individual amounts? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (1) Yes. Whilst the Department of Water (DoW) has not undertaken detailed costings for each action in the Plan, this is part of the Plan's implementation process that actions in regional water plans will be integrated into the DoW's annual business planning cycle. The Plan largely directs the prioritisation of work by the DoW and the Water Corporation and therefore most actions will be funded under existing programs. Any unfunded or partly funded actions will be subject to specific funding proposals as part of the normal business planning cycle.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5149

(a) Prior to the release of the Pilbara Regional Water Plan. (b) Not applicable. (2) This information is unable to be provided, as a final decision on this funding is still to be made by Cabinet. INFILL SEWERAGE PROGRAM — PORT HEDLAND 3199. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Water In reference to the re-funded infill sewerage program: (a) what is the process by which projects will be considered for inclusion in this program; (b) when will that process commence and when will it be completed; and (c) by what date will the people of Port Hedland know whether funds under this program will be allocated to respond to their needs for infill-sewerage works? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a)-(b) Announcements of infill sewerage projects for 2010-11 will be made in due course. (c) Please see below media statement released on Thursday 5 August 2010. Port Hedland is the first cab off the rank for new $100million infill sewerage program. Water Minister Graham Jacobs today announced two adjoining areas of Port Hedland, involving more than 250 residential blocks, would be provided with a sewerage service, funded from the Liberal-National Government's $100 million Infill Sewerage Program. Speaking in Port Hedland, Dr Jacobs said it was expected that tenders would be called for the estimated $7.5million project within three months with work expected to start next March and be completed in the spring of 2012. The areas involved were bounded by Anderson, Sutherland, Morgan and McGregor streets. Much of this area had been rezoned as part of the Port Hedland Land Use Master Plan. "I am very pleased to be here today to announce the first projects to be awarded for the 2010- 11 year will see sewerage connections installed in the Pilbara — the powerhouse of Australia," he said. "I recently visited the area and am satisfied that it meets all the health and other criteria for an immediate go ahead. "In the past two years, many of the lots to be sewered through this package have been rezoned under the Port Hedland Land Use Master Plan from R30 to R50 and R80 meaning there will be a lot of people living there in the future, making infill sewerage a key priority." The Minister said while the Water Corporation had completed detailed design for these projects, the preliminaries to works component would take about three months to complete. "That means the corporation will be able to call tenders just before Christmas," he said. "It is expected work will get under way in March 2011 following the wet season and continue over two winter cycles." Dr Jacobs said the Government would allocate $2million to allow the Water Corporation to undertake investigation and design work in various projected infill project areas across the State to get them 'shovel ready'. "We are examining further priority areas and the release of this money will allow for a head start on projects for the future," he said. "Expect further announcements on projects in the next few months." The Water Corporation will shortly inform the local community of all details of the Port Hedland projects.

PILBARA CITIES PROGRAM — FUNDING FOR WATER 3200. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Water (1) What funds are being allocated within the Minister’s water portfolio to ensure that the government’s Pilbara Cities program will be achieved?

5150 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(2) Specifically, what is the State Government doing to ensure the security of water in Port Hedland? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (1) The Water Corporation's current Capital Works Budget includes projects in the Pilbara to the value of approximately $47.4 million in 2010-2011. The Department of Water has allocated $54 000 for 2010-11, this is in addition to significant existing resources being directed towards this priority. These resources address source planning work for the Land Availability Working Group, source planning for town schemes, land-use planning and source investigations. (2) The Water Corporation is addressing the security of the water supply in the East Pilbara through two projects; one at the Yule River Borefield and one at the De Grey Borefield, using $9.8 million over the next four years. The Department of Water is working with other agencies and the private sector to identify and develop source options to meet the longer term need in Port Hedland. This may include options for the development of a new major source and interconnecting pipelines, borefield expansion and desalination. ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE — SUPPORT IN SCHOOLS 3202. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Education In light of a media statement from the Minister for Multicultural Interests which states that the launch of the directory follows the allocation of more than $7 million in the 2010–2011 State Budget to support students who speak English in Western Australian schools and that the additional funding will provide intensive English programs for newly-arrived students for up to two years before they enrol in mainstream public schools, can the Minister confirm whether the $7 million will support native English speakers or children who desperately need support with English as a second language? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: The recent budget announcement of $7 million has been allocated to enhance the current levels of support for English as a Second Language (ESL) students.

CULTURE AND THE ARTS PORTFOLIO — GRANTS AND SUBSIDIES 3215. Mr M.P. Murray to the Minister for Agriculture and Food (1) I refer to the 2010–2011 State Budget, division 64, page 795, under the heading ‘Income’, and ask: (a) under the item ‘Grants and Subsidies’, what is the breakdown of the $81.69 million for 2010– 2011 in terms of: (i) how much comes from federal funding and, if from different schemes, please detail the schemes and the amount from each; and (ii) how much comes from other sources, detailing the sources and the amounts from each source; and (b) what are the details of the revenue (sources and amounts) listed under the item ‘Other Revenue’? (2) Will the Minister provide the same details as provided for (1) above for the financial years 2008–2009 and 2009–2010? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: For the Department of Agriculture and Food; 1 (a) The 2010/11 Income grants and subsidies budget estimate of $81.69 million includes -: • $40.3 million of Commonwealth funding represented by -: $30 million for Caring For Our Country (CFOC) funds $10 million of Natural Heritage Trust funds in transition to CFOC $0.3 million of Miscellaneous Commonwealth Project activities; and; • $41.4 million of Industry funding from various industry sources represented by -: $10 million of Grain Research & Development Corporation funds $5 million Cooperative Research Centre Grants $2 million Australian Centre for International Agriculture Research Grants

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5151

$2 million NRM Third Party Grants $2 million Horticulture Australia Limited $1 million Australian Wool Innovation Pty Ltd $4.5 million various Agwest International Project Grants $0.3 million Meat and Livestocks Australia $0.3 million Dairy Research Corporation $14.3 million for around 150 miscellaneous research projects. (b) The 2010/11 "Other Revenue" budget estimate of $19.72 million includes -: • $3.3 million interest revenue • $0.9 million rent revenue • $7 million return of grant allocations • $2.3 million royalties • $0.3 million Other Revenue; and; Agriculture Protection Board $5.1 million Agriculture Producer Commission $0.02 million Rural Business Development Corporation $0.8 million 2 (a) The 2008/09 Actual, 2009/10 Budget and 2009/10 Estimated Actual for Income grants and subsidies includes -:

2008/09 2009/10 2009/10 Actual Budget Est. Actual $ million $ million $ million Commonwealth funding represented by -: 32.4 55.3 40.3 Caring For Our Country (CFOC) funds 0 45 30 Natural Heritage Trust funds in transition to CFOC 29.5 10 10 Miscellaneous Commonwealth Projects 2.9 0.3 0.3 Industry funding from various industry sources represented by -: 31.7 30.1 47.1 Grain Research & Development Corporation 7.5 8 8.6 Cooperative Research Centre Grants 2.8 4 3.8 Australian Centre for International Agriculture Research Grants 1.9 2 2.1 NRM Third Party Grants 4.3 1 1.5 Horticulture Australia Limited 1.7 1 0.6 Australian Wool Innovation Pty Ltd 0.9 0.8 0.8 Agwest International Project Grants 0.6 2.4 4.8 Meat and Livestocks Australia 0.5 0.3 0.3 Dairy Research Corporation 0.4 0.3 0.3 over 150 miscellaneous research projects. 11.1 10.3 24.3 Total Grants and subsidies 64.1 85.4 87.4

(b) The 2008/09 Actual, 2009/10 Budget and 2009/10 Estimated Actual for "Other Revenue" includes -

2008/09 2009/10 2009/10 Actual Budget Est. Actual $ million $ million $ million Interest revenue 3 4.3 3.3 Rent revenue 0.7 0.8 0.8 Return of grant allocations 13 9 9 Royalties 3.2 2.2 2.2 Other Revenue 0.6 0.3 0.3 Service Delivery Agreement Revenue for Agriculture Protection Board 6.4 5.9 5.9 Agriculture Producer Commission 0.06 0.05 0.05 Rural Business Development Corporation 0.9 0.9 0.9 Total Other Revenue 27.86 23.45 22.45

5152 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

PUBLIC SECTOR — REGIONAL EMPLOYEES 3222. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to page 260 of the 2010–2011 State Budget papers, in particular, line item ‘Employees (Full-Time Equivalents)’, listed under Regional Investment and Regional Policy, and I ask: (a) of those full-time equivalents, how many are based permanently in the regions; and (b) where are they based? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) 6 full-time equivalents are currently permanently based in the regions, and an additional 4 full-time equivalents will be permanently based in the regions during 2010-2011. (b) 3 full-time equivalents in Kununurra 4 full-time equivalents in Karratha 1 full-time equivalent in Albany 1 full-time equivalent in Boddington 1 full-time equivalent in Dowerin JIGALONG COMMUNITY — ESSENTIAL SERVICES PILOT 3223. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the line item on page 261 of the State Budget papers regarding the Jigalong Essential Services Pilot, and I ask, what specifically will be funded in this pilot? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The Department of Regional Development and Lands is currently investigating the provision of essential services including water and power to the Jigalong Community. Following the investigation it will be determined, in consultation with the Jigalong Community, how best and where specifically the funding will be allocated.. REGIONAL PRICES INDEX — PORT HEDLAND COSTS 3224. Mr T.G. Stephens to the Minister for Regional Development In reference to the Regional Prices Index (RPI) conducted in November 2007 and used as the basis for the District Allowance Offer: (a) will the Minister advise when the next RPI is to be conducted; (b) in view of the changed circumstances since the last RPI was conducted, as evidenced by the House & Land snapshots published on the Pilbara Development Commission’s website which demonstrate that costs in Hedland are now significantly higher than all other Pilbara towns, will the Minister ensure that the next RPI is undertaken soon; and (c) will any adjustment in District Allowance be awarded to the Port Hedland officers who have been disadvantaged by the relatively recent increased costs – increases which are not reflected in the November 2007 work upon which the District Allowances Offer has been based; and (i) if not, why not? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a)-(b) The prices for the RPI will be collected in the first half of 2011. (c) Not applicable. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONS — REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETINGS 3225. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the Review Committee for the Regional Development Commissions chaired by the Hon. Wendy Duncan, MLC, and ask: (a) how long has the Committee been meeting; (b) where does the Committee meet; (c) what are the names and titles of all persons who attended meetings of the Committee for the months of January–May 2010; and (d) are minutes of the meetings taken; and (i) if so, will the Minister table the minutes of the meetings for this year?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5153

Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) The Committee has been meeting since Tuesday, 27 April 2010. (b) The Committee has met at the Department of Regional Development and Lands, Level 10 Dumas House, 2 Havelock St West Perth. (c) The names and titles of all persons who attend meetings of the Committee are: Chair: Hon Wendy Duncan MLC — Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Regional Development Mr Doug Cunningham — Chief of Staff, Office of the Minister for Regional Development Mrs Petrice Judge — A/Deputy Commissioner, Strategic Policy and Planning, Public Sector Commission Mr Graham Thomson — Chair of the Regional Development Council Mr Paul Rosair — Director General, Department of Regional Development and Lands Executive Support: Mr Mike Rowe — A/Director, Regional Policy Development and Operations, Department of Regional Development and Lands Ms Katie Bawden — Research Officer, Department of Regional Development and Lands (d) Yes (i) No, the minutes are subject to Cabinet confidentiality. WATER USAGE — CONCESSION ANOMALY 3226. Mr C.J. Tallentire to the Minister for Water Minister, constituents are concerned about the future of water usage concessions for pension concession card holders. There appears to be a big difference between the concessions given for the October 2008–March 2009 bill compared to the October 2009–March 2009 bill, and so I ask, will the Minister confirm that the concessions for pension concession card holders for water usage will be kept up pro-rata with any increases to Water Corporation water usage charges? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Water use concessions in the metropolitan area are provided under by-law 18A of the Water Agencies (Charges) By-laws 1987. Where a pensioner has registered his or her entitlement with the Water Corporation, the concession applies for the first 150 kL of water used during a 12-month period by 50%. The concession was introduced in 1993/1994 and has not changed. GRADUATE TEACHER IN THE CLASSROOM PROGRAM 3227. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Education I refer to the Graduate Teacher in the Classroom Programme (or its successor) run by the Professional Learning Institute and the recent changes made to it, and ask: (a) was there consultation with the State School Teachers’ Union of Western Australia; and (i) if not, why not; (b) why was a decision made to exclude teachers appointed for less than six months; (c) why have no new graduates been allocated to coaches (now called advocates) until May 2010; (d) why was no arrangement made to ensure graduates were offered coaches from the beginning of the teaching year; (e) how many new graduates were appointed for six months or more and still have no advocate as of 14 June 2010; (f) how much money has been expended from the programme to pay advocates from 1 January 2010 to date; and (g) how much money has been expended to pay management of the programme from 1 January 2010 to date? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) No. (i) Changes to the program were as a result of the requirement to change the mode of employment of coaches (now called advocates) to comply with the Financial Management Act 2006 and the Mode of Employment Policy.

5154 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) The first tender process resulted in a pool of 22 suitably-qualified people to take on the role. This limited the number of graduates who could be provided with an advocate. Those graduates who have gained only short-term employment with the Department will gain entry to the program once they have secured an appointment of six months or longer. (c) The tender process, managed by TendersWA was not completed until 30 March, 2010. As part of improvements to the program, an enhanced training program for advocates was developed by the Professional Learning Institute, to prepare them for the role. Following this training, advocates were allocated graduates on 19 and 20 April. (d) No arrangement was made to ensure that new graduates were offered coaches by the beginning of the teaching year because there were no coaches who had been trained in the methodology or the content of the revised program. However, graduates who began teaching in 2009 and had not received their full entitlement of coaching support and wished to continue with their previous coach, were able to continue in 2010. Thirteen took up the offer. (e) As of 14 June 2010, there were 18 graduates with six month contracts who did not have an advocate. By 18 June 2010 all of these graduates were paired with an advocate following a second tender process, finalised on 14 June 2010, to accommodate the demand. (f) Payment of advocates from 1 January until 9 August 2010 has amounted to $121 027.47. (g) From 1 January until 9 August 2010, $162 110.80 has been expended on program management.

SCHOOLS IN ALFRED COVE ELECTORATE — REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE ITEMS 3228. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Education (1) In relation to the Building Condition Assessment (BCA) Report which the Minister tabled in Parliament on 19 March 2009, could the Minister please provide the list of repair and maintenance items that are still outstanding, the estimated cost of completing these repair and maintenance items, and the expected date of completion of these repair and maintenance items for each of the following schools within the Alfred Cove Electorate: (a) Applecross Primary School; (b) Applecross Senior High School; (c) Ardross Primary School; (d) Attadale Primary School; (e) Bicton Primary School; (f) Booragoon Primary School; (g) Mount Pleasant Primary School; and (h) Palmyra Primary School. (2) In relation to the BCA Report, will the Minister please list for each of the school districts, all the schools requiring roof repairs and replacements? (3) For each of the schools listed at (2), will the Minister advise: (a) the date the Department of Education was first informed of the need for repairs or replacement; (b) the cost of the roof repairs or replacement; and (c) the expected date that the repairs or replacement will be made? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (1) Given the volume of maintenance work undertaken at all public schools across the State during 2009/10 under the Federal Government's Building the Education Revolution — National School Pride Program and the fact that a new Building Condition Assessment (BCA) survey for these schools is planned to commence this month, it is not practical to provide the information at this time. It is anticipated that the information gathered in the new Building Condition Assessment survey will be consolidated into a report by October this year. Allocations were made for each of the schools in the Alfred Cove Electorate under the Federal Government's Building the Education Revolution — National School Pride Program in 2009. The majority of the funding was spent on maintenance items. The actual allocations for each school were as follows:- (a) Applecross Primary School $150 000 (b) Applecross Senior High School $200 000

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5155

(c) Ardross Primary School $150 000 (d) Attadale Primary School $150 000 (e) Bicton Primary School $150 000 (f) Booragoon Primary School $150 000 (g) Mount Pleasant Primary School $150 000 (h) Palmyra Primary School $125 000 (2) The following schools have been identified by the Department of Treasury and Finance — Building Management and Works as requiring significant roof replacement/repair work:- (i) Albany District Albany Senior High School Flinders Park Primary School Kojonup District High School Spencer Park Primary School (ii) Bunbury District Adam Road Primary School Amaroo Primary School Australind Primary School Australind Senior High School Brunswick Primary School Bunbury Senior High School Collie Senior High School Newton Moore Senior High School (iii) Canning District Kelmscott Senior High School Kent Street Senior High School Kingsley Primary School Redcliffe Primary School Thornlie Senior High School (iv) Esperance District Cascade Primary School Castletown Primary School Grass Patch Primary School Esperance Primary School Nulsen Primary School (v) Fremantle — Peel District Applecross Primary School Ardross Primary School Bungaree Primary School Carcoola Primary School East Hamilton Hill Primary School North Fremantle Primary School North Lake Senior Campus North Parmelia Primary School Oberthur Primary School Orelia Primary School Rockingham Senior High School South Fremantle Senior High School White Gum Valley Primary School (vi) Goldfields District Kalgoorlie Boulder Community High School Laverton School Leonora District High School North Kalgoorlie Primary School South Kalgoorlie Primary School (vii) Kimberley District Broome Camp School Derby District High School

5156 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Halls Creek District High School One Arm Point Remote Community School (viii) Midlands District Bruce Rock District High School Dalwallinu District High School Kellerberrin District High School Narembeen District High School Northam Primary School Quairading District High School Wongan Hills District High School Wundowie Primary School (ix) Midwest District Carnarvon Senior High School Dongara District High School East Carnarvon Primary School Geraldton Primary School Holland Street School ohn Willcock College Kalbarri District High School Leeman Primary School Mingenew Primary School Mount Tarcoola Rangeway Primary School (x) Narrogin District Braeside Primary School (xi) Pilbara District Baler Primary School South Hedland Primary School (xii) Swan District Anzac Terrace Primary School Ashfield Primary School Balga Senior High School Bayswater Primary School Camboon Primary School Cyril Jackson Senior Campus Darlington Primary School Easter Hills Senior High School Embleton Primary School Girrawheen Senior High School Guildford Primary School Hampton Park Primary School Hampton Senior High School Highgate Primary School Hillcrest Primary School Lockridge Senior High School Mirrabooka Senior High School Morley Senior High School Mount Helena Primary School Mt Lawley Primary School North Balga Primary School North Perth Primary School Waddington Primary School Warriapendi Primary School (xiii) Warren-Blackwood District Augusta Primary School Busselton Senior High School Manjimup Senior High School Margaret River Senior High School (xiv) West Coast District

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5157

Duncraig Senior High School Greenwood Senior High School Rosalie Primary School (3) (a)-(c) The incidence of roof leaks in schools is generally not reported to the Department of Education. In most cases, roof leaks are reported by schools as breakdown repairs through the Department of Treasury and Finance – Building Management and Works call centre. Pre-tender cost estimates for the work at the schools listed in part (2) are not available at present. The expected dates that roof repairs or replacement will be undertaken at these schools will depend upon the future availability of funds. In May 2009, the Government announced a four-year $20 million roof replacement program for schools which have experienced severe roof leaks over a number of years. The initial package of projects will include roof replacement work at the following schools:- Albany Senior High School Applecross Primary School Australind Senior High School Baler Primary School Bunbury Senior High School Bungaree Primary School Carcoola Primary School Castletown Primary School Collie Senior High School Duncraig Senior High School Eastern Hills Senior High School Geraldton Primary School John Willcock College Kalgoorlie-Boulder Community High School Kellerberrin District High School Kelmscott Senior High School Kent Street Senior High School Kojonup District High School Laverton School Manjimup Senior High School North Kalgoorlie Primary School One Arm Point Remote Community School South Hedland Primary School Wundowie Primary School Most of the work in the initial package of work will go out to tender in September this year and actually be undertaken during the 2010/11 Christmas holiday period. Work in the northwest regions is planned to be undertaken during July/August this year to avoid the wet season. The remaining funding will be used to undertake two additional packages of work during 2011/12 and 2012/13. Details of the schools which will be included in these packages will be announced at a later date.

PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3229. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education I refer to the 2010–2011 State Budget re-cashflow of the 2009–2010 3% Efficiency Dividend Shortfall, and ask: (a) do the 3% Efficiency Dividend targets, as listed in the Forward Estimates of the 2009–2010 State Budget, still have to be met; and (i) if so, are the re-cashflowed entries added to those targets; (b) what are the 3% efficiency target amounts for 2010–2011, 2011–2012 and 2012–2013; (c) if those targets are to be met, what specific areas will be cut; and (d) if a decision has not yet been made on what specific areas to cut, what specific areas are under consideration for cuts to meet the 3% efficiency dividend targets?

5158 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) Yes. (i) The total 3 per cent Efficiency Dividend (determined in 2009/10) over the forward estimates period is unchanged. For 2009/10, the Department has identified and been funded for a savings shortfall of $51.9 million. The 2009/10 shortfall has been re-cash flowed over the three out years commencing 2011/12 ($17.3 million per year additional savings required). (b) Savings targets are now: 2010/11 $96.3 million 2011/2012 $116.67 million 2012/13 $122.0 million (c)-(d) From 2010/11 the Efficiency Dividend is no longer specifically identified in the Department's budget. No specific savings measures have been approved at this time. KINDERGARTEN STUDENT ENROLMENT 3230. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education For each education district: (a) how many schools are there with kindergarten students enrolled and how many kindergarten students are enrolled in each school; and (b) how many kindergarten students in total are there in each district? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a)-(b) [See paper 2387.] SCHOOLS — ASSAULT NOTIFICATIONS 3231. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education For the period 3 June 2009 to 3 June 2010, how many online incident notifications has the Department of Education received that notified of an incident of alleged assault, either physical or verbal: (a) by a student on another student; (b) by a parent against a student; (c) by a parent against a teacher; and (d) by a student against a teacher? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) 270 physical assaults and 58 verbal threats or comment (b) 12 physical assaults and 24 verbal threats or comments. It is important to note that the Online Incident Notification System only allows the description 'Parent or family member', so these figures include actions by family members other than parents (for example, siblings). (c)-(d) Accurate numbers cannot be provided because, while reporters can indicate by whom, and against whom, the assault or threat has been committed, they can only nominate 'staff' as being the victim of the assault or threat. The reporting system does not disaggregate this in to types of staff (e.g. principal, teacher, education assistant, cleaner or gardener). DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICES — REDUCTION 3232. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education I refer to the Liberal election promise to cut district education office numbers from 14 to six, consisting of two metropolitan and four regional offices, and ask: (a) does the Minister intend to keep the promise to reduce district education offices to the numbers stated; and (i) if not, why not; (b) will fulfilment of the election commitment to cut district education offices from 14 to six contribute to the 3% efficiency dividend; and (i) if so, how much will be saved; (c) when the 14 districts are cut to six, how many of the full-time equivalents (FTEs) currently in district education offices will be cut and will the people themselves be redeployed or sacked;

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5159

(d) of those to be redeployed, if regionally based, will that redeployment be outside their home town; and (e) if the number of district education offices is to be reduced to a number greater than six: (i) will this reduction contribute to the 3% efficiency dividend; and (A) if so, how much will be saved; (ii) how many of the FTEs currently in district education offices will be cut and will the people themselves be redeployed or sacked; and (iii) of those to be redeployed, if regionally based, will that redeployment be outside their home town? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a)-(e) The Western Australian Government is still considering possible changes to the Education District structure and no decision has yet been taken. When a decision has been made, it will then need to be considered through the Cabinet process.

SCHOOLS — VOLUNTARY FEE COLLECTION 3233. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education I refer to the 2010–2011 State Budget, Division 29, page 370, Net Appropriation Determination, line item ‘Fees – Other’, and ask: (a) does this item refer to the voluntary fees collected by schools; and (i) if not, are they listed anywhere in the State Budget papers, or do they stay within the individual schools’ budgets; (b) given that many schools collect very little in voluntary fees compared with other schools in wealthier areas, does the Department of Education do anything to offset the resulting inequality; (c) has an audit of schools ever been done which takes into account the amounts collected in voluntary fees and any low socio-economic compensatory funding to see if the Department’s compensatory measures offset the deficiency in voluntary fees; and (i) if not, will the Minister commit to doing such an audit; (d) if a school collects very little in voluntary fees, does it just make do with what is provided, or is it encouraged to approach the Department of Education seeking further supplementary funding; (e) does the Department of Education seek out and offer assistance to schools that collect very little in the voluntary fees, or does it wait until the school is in financial trouble or the school approaches the Department before it takes any sort of action; and (f) if a school approaches the Department and advises that it has only been able to collect an unusually low amount of fees, perhaps due to a spike in unemployment in its catchment area, for instance, what action is the Department likely to take – would it provide extra funds based on the school’s normal collection rate? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) No. (i) This revenue is included in the Income Statement. The amount collected by each school is retained by each school. (b) A Secondary Assistance Allowance of $235 is available to schools for each of the Year 8 to 10 students whose parents hold Centrelink Family Health Care or Pensioner Concession Cards or Veterans' Affairs Pensioner Concession Cards. The School Grant includes a School Support Program Resource Allocation, which takes into account the socio-economic status of each school. Should any individual school experience financial hardship an application for supplementary funding to address any financial shortfall can be made to the Department. (c) No. (i) Funding policy, procedures and monitoring processes ensure that schools are sufficiently funded to carry out their learning programs. (d) If a school recognises there is a shortfall in the voluntary collections, it would assess the impact on its ability to provide a quality learning program for all students.

5160 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Following this assessment the school is required to contact the Director Schools who will review the situation. The Deputy Director General, Finance and Administration would be required to approve supplementary funding, on a case-by-case basis. (e) Yes, the Department has pre-emptive processes to identify schools at financial risk. School bank balances are reviewed monthly to identify any potential cash flow difficulties. Schools are also continuously monitored through a financial risk profiling process. If a school is considered a high financial risk, a Senior Finance Consultant (Schools) would work with the school to assess the situation and take appropriate preventive actions. Schools are also advised to seek assistance from the Department promptly if it anticipates potential financial trouble. (f) The Department would assess the situation, as described in (d) above.

KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS — DIAGNOSTIC TESTING 3234. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education I refer to the introduction of on-entry diagnostic testing in literacy and numeracy for kindergarten students, and ask: (a) what provision, if any, has been made to train teachers in the administration of the diagnostic tools; (b) does this provision include additional relief teacher time so that kindergarten teachers have time to become adept at administering this assessment; (c) are these diagnostic tests administered individually, that is, are they administered on a one-to-one basis with the teacher assessing one student at a time; and (i) if so, how long for each child would the tests take; (ii) if so, what provision has been made to release teachers from teaching duties so that they can administer the tests; and (iii) if no provision has been made, who supervises the class while the teacher assesses each student? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) Each participating school was provided with background information, an overview of the assessment, a training guide for teachers and principals and a detailed resource kit. A new training guide specifically for Western Australian schools is being prepared for Phase 2 implementation in Term 4, 2010. Support will also be available via the website and central IT and On Entry personnel. (b) No additional relief teacher time was provided, however schools were able to make local decisions and provide teacher release from within their own resources if necessary. (c) The assessments are administered on a one to one basis with the teacher administering the assessment. Selected tasks may be administered in groups or as a whole class. (i) The literacy assessment takes approximately 30-40 minutes per student to administer. (ii) Participating schools made different arrangements to support the administration of the assessment including making teacher relief time available and/or utilising additional teaching support, specialist literacy teachers and administration (eg. deputy) staff. There were teachers who also utilised some duties other than teaching time. (iii) Participating schools will make different arrangements, including the involvement of specialist teachers, administrators and relief teachers, to ensure classes are appropriately supervised while assessment takes place.

SCHOOLS — STUDENT INCREASE FUNDING 3235. Mrs M.H. Roberts to the Minister for Education I refer to the 2010–2011 State Budget allocation of $16.978 million for growth in student numbers, and ask: (a) what increase in student numbers does the allocated $16.978 million cover; (b) what increase in student numbers did the estimated actual figure of $18.414 million cover; and (c) is there a formula used to calculate the added cost for each additional student; and (i) if so, what is it?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5161

Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) Additional funds of $16.978 million in 2010/11 were appropriated for full-time equivalent student growth of 3 741 in 2009 and 240 in 2010. (b) Additional funds of $18.414 million in 2009/10 were appropriated for full-time equivalent student growth of 3 741 in 2009 and 240 in 2010. (c) Yes (i) The funding formula allocates additional teachers and education assistants based on full time equivalent student growth. The formula is: Primary — 1 teacher per additional 15.8 FTE students and 1 education assistant per additional 43.26 FTE students. Secondary — 1 teacher per additional 12.1 FTE students and 1 education assistant per additional 17.96 FTE students. REGIONAL GRANTS SCHEME — DONGARA TELECENTRE 3236. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the first round of the Regional Grants Scheme and the $20,000 provided to the Dongara Telecentre for enhancing educational training, and ask: (a) who will the training be provided for; (b) who will be providing the training; (c) has the training been completed; and (i) if so, what was the final complete cost of the training? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) Training will be provided for off campus TAFE/University students, mature age students and the broader community. (b) Training is provided by a variety of providers. The Community Resource Centre staff provide some training including First/Second Click training courses. The Durack Institute of Technology (formerly Central West TAFE) are also a provider as part of an 'Off Campus Flexible Learning' program. (c) The enhanced educational training facility has been completed. The use of the facility for training is ongoing. (i) The provision of training is not included in the scope of the project. The project's scope is limited to providing the facility to conduct training in. The total project cost for the provision of the facility, including fit-out was $45,445 (cash only, ex GST). REGIONAL GRANTS SCHEME — DONGARA GOLF CLUB 3237. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the first round of the Regional Grants Scheme and the $25,000 provided to the Dongara Golf Club Inc. for the on-course eco toilets and drinking fountain, and ask: (a) has the project been completed; (i) if yes, what was the final cost of the project; and (ii) if not, when will the project be completed and what is the estimated final cost of the project; (b) did the project go to tender; and (i) if so, who was the successful tenderer; (ii) if not, what is the name of the business which undertook, or is undertaking, the project; and (c) are there any project management costs associated with the project; and (i) if so, how much are those costs; and (ii) if so, are these project management costs included in the $25,000 funding for the project?

5162 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) Yes (i) The total project cost was $27,268 (cash only, ex GST). (ii) Not Applicable (b) No. Recipient provided suitable quotes with the application and subsequently sought further quotes to reduce costs. (i) Not Applicable (ii) Businesses involved in the project include: - Rotaloo W.A. - Irwin Plumbing Services - Central West Concrete - Reids Mechweld - Dongara Building & Trade Supplies - K.W. Boyle (c) No. Dongara Golf Club Inc. provided in-kind management and administration of the project. (i)-(ii) Not applicable REGIONAL GRANTS SCHEME — KATANNING REGIONAL BUSINESS ASSOCIATION 3238. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the first round of the Regional Grants Scheme and $60,000 of funding to the Katanning Regional Business Association towards the installation of closed-circuit television (CCTV), and I ask: (a) has the CCTV been installed; and (i) if yes, what is the location of the CCTV; and (ii) if yes, what was the final cost of the installation of the CCTV; (b) what is the specific breakdown of costs associated with the installation of the CCTV; (c) who is responsible for screening the CCTV? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) The installation of the CCTV is not yet complete. The cabling has been installed, and the Katanning Regional Business Association has committed to completing the project by 30 September 2010. (i) The CCTV cabling has been installed in Clive Street and Austral Terrace, Katanning. (ii) The final cost will not be known until the project is complete. Once the final cost is known (end of September 2010) I will provide the Member with this information. (b) The breakdown of cost items associated with the installation of the CCTV as provided by the Katanning Regional Business Association for the development of the grant agreement is as follows: Cost item Cost ex GST (per unit) Main system and Shire building coverage $85,677 Digital encoder and wireless video transmitter (Clive Street) $13,348.59 Digital encoder and wireless video transmitter (Austral Terrace) $13,348.59 Wireless link to the Police Station $4,430 Camera unit (each) $2,000 (c) The Shire of Katanning will house the main recorder. A wireless link will stream footage from the main recorder to a dedicated laptop at the Katanning Police station. REGIONAL GRANTS SCHEME — DENMARK RIVERMOUTH CARAVAN PARK 3239. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the first round of the Regional Grants Scheme and $107,100 of funding to the Denmark Rivermouth Caravan Park, and ask: (a) is the caravan park a private venture; and (i) if so, what are the name(s) of the owner or owners; and (ii) if not, who owns/runs the caravan park;

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5163

(b) what is the specific breakdown of costs associated with the $107,100 funding to the caravan park for the power supply and headworks; and (c) has the project been completed; and (i) if so, what was the final cost of the works; and (ii) if not, when will works be completed? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) Yes, on land leased from the Shire of Denmark. (i) Denmark Unit Trust for JenBrook Nominees trading as the Denmark Rivermouth Caravan Park. (ii) Not Applicable. (b) $97,000 for Distributed Headworks Charge and $10,000 for Switchgear. (c) Yes (i) $299,042 (ex GST) (ii) Not Applicable. REGIONAL GRANTS SCHEME — TASTE PTY LTD 3240. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the first round of the Regional Grants Scheme and $25,000 of funding to Taste Pty Ltd towards the creation of new down-stream products using French black truffles, and ask: (a) have these down-stream products been created; and (i) if so, what is the nature of these down-stream products; and (ii) if not, why not; (b) how did the $25,000 assist in the creation of the down-stream products; (c) are the products destined for export or local consumption; (d) where is Taste Pty Ltd based; and (e) what is the name of the owner of Taste Pty Ltd? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) No. (i) Not applicable. (ii) The project is not due for completion until 14 December 2010. (b) $10,000 for Organic chemistry research and development, $10,000 for Pilot Scale Production and $5,000 for Product Development. (c) Both. (d) Denmark, WA. (e) The Australian States Truffle Enterprise Pty Ltd. FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN 2004-2013 — FORESTED AREAS LOST 3241. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment In relation to the Key Performance Indicator No. 4 in the Forest Management Plan (FMP) 2004–2013, which has a performance target of no permanent loss of net area of forested land, will the Minister advise whether there has been a permanent loss of net area of forested land in the Swan, South-West and Warren Forest regions since the FMP came into operation on 1 January 2004; and (a) if so, what is the area of forested land that has been permanently lost in each of the Swan, South-West and Warren Forest Regions? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: a) The permanent clearing of forested land within the Forest Management Plan 2004-2013 area arises from the construction of infrastructure such as major roads, dams, pipelines, powerlines and airstrips. Data extracted during the period 2004 to 2008 inclusive indicates that the area of State forest that was permanently cleared and from which forest products were recovered by the Forest Products Commission was 0 hectares in the Swan Region; 42 hectares in the South West Region; and 13 hectares in the Warren Region.

5164 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

REGIONAL GRANTS SCHEME — COWARAMUP UNDERGROUND POWER PROJECT 3242. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the Regional Grants Scheme funding of $132,000 to the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River for the Cowaramup Mainstreet Underground Power project, and ask: (a) what is the total cost of the project; (b) how much is being contributed by the Shire towards the project; (c) is any part of the $132,000 State Government contribution being provided by the Office of Energy; and (i) if so, what is that amount; (d) has the Office of Energy provided any amount to the project in addition to the $132,000 State Government contribution; and (i) if so, how much; (e) does any Office of Energy funding include a contribution from Western Power; and (i) if so, how much is the Western Power contribution; and (ii) if not, is there a separate contribution from Western Power and how much is that contribution; (f) as a percentage of the total cost of the project, what is the total State Government contribution; and (g) in reference to a report in the Augusta Margaret River Times, dated 25 December 2009, that the $132,000 was offered to the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River, will the Minister confirm that an offer of funding was made prior to a formal application from the Shire; and (i) if so, who made that offer to the Shire? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) $496 153. (b) $76 000. (c) No. (i) Not applicable. (d) Yes. (i) $248 000. (e) No. (i)-(ii) Not applicable. (f) 76 per cent. (g) No. A letter was sent to the Shire of Augusta Margaret River on 29 June 2009 advising of the success of their application for funding from the 2008/09 South West Regional Grants Scheme. A media statement was issued on 8 July 2009 advising of the successful recipients from the Shire of Augusta Margaret River, including $132 153 towards underground power in Cowaramup. (i) Not applicable. PUBLIC DRUNKENNESS — LEGISLATION CHANGE 3243. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Police It has come to my attention that previously in Western Australia public drunkenness was an offence for which a person could be arrested by a police officer. Could the Minister please advise: (a) when the relevant legislation in Western Australia was amended to remove the ability of police officers to arrest a person for being drunk in public; and (b) what was the rationale behind this amendment to the legislation? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: (a) The relevant offence was contained in section 44 of the Police Act 1892. The offence was repealed from the statute by the Acts Amendment (Detention of Drunken Persons) Act 1989. This Act commenced on 27 April 1990. (b) The Acts Amendment (Detention of Drunken Persons) Act 1989 inserted Part VA into the Police Act. This Part provided police with powers to apprehend persons intoxicated by alcohol and detain

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5165

them in a police facility until they are fit for release or release them to the care of a third person who is capable of taking adequate care of the person. The rationale behind these measures is contained with the relevant second reading speech delivered by the Minister for Justice on 5 December 1989 - "This Bill will implement the last major item in the package of measures to reduce the rate of imprisonment which the Attorney General announced in a ministerial statement on 29 October 1987. This package is part of the Government's program of reform of the criminal law...... that program has been guided by the principle that more severe penalties should be provided for the most serious offences, especially those involving violence or drugs, but that greater emphasis should be placed on non-custodial alternatives for what may reasonably be regarded as lesser offences...... " Hansard also goes on to cite the following reasons to support the introduction of the legislation: • To reduce the role of the criminal justice system for dealing with drunken persons; and • To reduce the number of court appearances and pressures on police time. This legislation is consistent with the recommendations of the Vincent Inquiry into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and the Court of Criminal Appeal's view that imprisonment should be a sentence option of last resort. SPECTACLES SUBSIDY — REVIEW 3244. Mr C.J. Tallentire to the Minister for Health In answer to Question on Notice No. 2681(4), the Minister said he would ensure that the State Government will continue the subsidy for current eligible applicants on spectacles. However, the Government’s Seniors Card website advises that a subsidy of up to $50 on a pair of spectacles every two years is available by completing a claim form available from optometrists, optical dispensers and the Department of Health Western Australia. It also advises that this scheme is currently under review and eligibility criteria may change. Does the Minister stand by what he said in the House on 18 May 2010, or is the spectacle subsidy safe? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Yes. The Spectacle Subsidy will remain available to current eligible applicants. PUBLIC SECTOR — FEES AND CHARGES 3245. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development Can the Premier please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Details of fees and charges are reported in the Annual Reports of Government agencies. It is also noted that some agencies also provide a list of fees and charges on their websites. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3246. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs Can the Deputy Premier please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3247. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years:

5166 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3248. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3249. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Education; Tourism Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within her portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3250. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly question on notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3251. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3252. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5167

(a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3253. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3254. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3255. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services Can the Attorney General please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3256. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within her portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3257. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Water; Mental Health Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years:

5168 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3258. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3259. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3260. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within her portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC SECTOR – FEES AND CHARGES 3261. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer Can the Minister please provide a listing of all fees and charges administered by each agency within his portfolio for each of the following years: (a) 2010–2011; (b) 2009–2010; and (c) 2008–2009? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3245. PUBLIC CORPORATIONS — REFUNDS OF PAST YEARS REVENUE COLLECTIONS 3262. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 121 of 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2 presents Item 28 and the doubling of ‘Refunds of Past Years Revenue Collections – Public Corporations’ in 2010–2011. In relation to this, I ask:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5169

(a) why is this item estimated to double in size during 2010–2011; (b) which public corporations are expected to receive this refund; and (c) is there a statutory obligation, or other stated obligation, to refund this collected revenue? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) The provision has been increased across the forward estimates period in recognition that past provisions have often not been sufficient to provide for the highly volatile size of National Tax Equivalent Regime (NTER) refunds. (b) The Insurance Commission of Western Australia has already been refunded $5.4 million as part of a deferred refund for the 2008-09 year. The remaining funds are not currently attributed to any specific agency as refunds can change significantly in both volume and size from year to year with previous performance no indicator of activity across the forward estimates for particular agencies. (c) Yes, this appropriation meets the State's obligation to refund public corporations that have overpaid NTER instalments. This is consistent with the administrative arrangement by which Commonwealth income taxation laws are notionally applied to State and Territory government-owned enterprises. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY AND FINANCE — DIVIDENDS INCREASE 3263. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 144 of 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2 details that total dividends administered by the Department of Treasury and Finance are estimated to increase by $124.4 million from what was listed in the 2009–2010 State Budget. In relation to this, I ask: (a) how much of this increase is contributed by increases to electricity charges and fees; (b) how much of this increase in dividends is dependent on the 10% increase to the A1/A2 electricity tariff in 2010–2011; and (c) how much of this increase in dividends is dependent on the 17.7% increase to the average household water charge? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) No portion of the dividend increase is attributable to the increases in electricity charges and fees, as an offsetting reduction in the Community Service Obligation (operating subsidy) payment ensures these tariff increases have no net impact on the profitability of, and therefore the dividend payments from, the electricity entities. (a) No portion of the dividend increase is attributable to the increase in the A1/A2 electricity tariff in 2010- 11 as an offsetting reduction in the Community Service Obligation (operating subsidy) payment ensures these tariff increases have no net impact on the profitability of, and therefore the dividend payments from, the electricity entities. (b) Not applicable. After taking into account changes to both revenue and costs, the dividends forecast for the Water Corporation in the 2010–11 Budget are expected to decrease by approximately $15.2 million in 2010–11 compared to the 2009–10 estimated actual. PUBLIC CORPORATIONS — REFUNDS OF PAST YEARS REVENUE COLLECTIONS 3264. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 121 of 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2 presents Item 28 and the doubling of ‘Refunds of Past Years Revenue Collections – Public Corporations’ in 2010–2011. In relation to this, I ask: (a) why is this item estimated to double in size during 2010–2011; (b) which public corporations are expected to receive this refund; and (c) is there a statutory obligation, or other stated obligation, to refund this collected revenue? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) The provision has been increased across the forward estimates period in recognition that past provisions have often not been sufficient to provide for the highly volatile size of National Tax Equivalent Regime (NTER) refunds. (b) The Insurance Commission of Western Australia has already been refunded $5.4 million as part of a deferred refund for the 2008-09 year. The remaining funds are not currently attributed to any specific agency as refunds can change significantly in both volume and size from year to year with previous performance no indicator of activity across the forward estimates for particular agencies.

5170 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(c) Yes, this appropriation meets the State's obligation to refund public corporations that have overpaid NTER instalments. This is consistent with the administrative arrangement by which Commonwealth income taxation laws are notionally applied to State and Territory government-owned enterprises. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3265. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Premier’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3266. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3267. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5171

(a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3268. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3269. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Education; Tourism Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters.

5172 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3270. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009?10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009?10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009?10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3271. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3272. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5173

Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3273. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3274. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3275. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming

5174 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Attorney General’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3276. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3277. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Water; Mental Health Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5175

(b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3278. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3279. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3280. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-

5176 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — THREE PER CENT EFFICIENCY DIVIDEND 3281. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer Answers to Questions on Notice on 20 April 2010 indicated that in relation to the 3% efficiency dividend, an update on the achievement of corrective measures for the 2009–2010 year would be announced in the coming budget. Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook stated that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid- year Review includes savings of $381 million, made through the 3% efficiency dividend. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the 3% efficiency dividend in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 114-115, which provides a breakdown by agency of the 3% efficiency dividend savings. (b) As detailed in the 2009-10 Budget and updated for implementation status in the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all 3% efficiency dividend savings have been reflected in the ongoing budget allocation of agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report efficiency dividend savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3282. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Premier’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5177

Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3283. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3284. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3285. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget?

5178 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3286. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Education; Tourism Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3287. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3288. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5179

(a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3289. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3290. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters.

5180 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3291. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3292. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Attorney General’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3293. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5181

(b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3294. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Water; Mental Health Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3295. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3296. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and

5182 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters.

PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3297. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters.

PUBLIC SECTOR — ECONOMIC AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3298. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $151.9 million made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through Stage 1 of the Economic Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010–2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 111-113, which provides a breakdown by agency of estimated savings associated with the Economic Audit Stage 1. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Economic Audit Stage 1 savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Economic Audit Stage 1 savings measures. Having rolled out these savings measures, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5183

PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3299. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Premier’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3300. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3301. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant

5184 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3302. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3303. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Education; Tourism Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3304. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5185

Mr M.J. COWPER replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3305. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3306. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3307. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio:

5186 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters.

PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3308. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters.

PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3309. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Attorney General’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5187

PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3310. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3311. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Water; Mental Health Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3312. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings.

5188 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3313. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3314. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — CAPITAL WORKS AUDIT — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3315. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer Page 4 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the operating surplus for 2009–2010 is estimated to be $290 million, up from $51 million presented in the Mid-year Review. This amount in the Mid-year Review includes savings of $346.6 million made through the Capital Works Audit. In relation to each agency within the Minister’s portfolio: (a) what actual savings will be made through the Capital Works Audit in the 2009–2010 year, the 2010– 2011 year and each year of the forward estimates; and (b) why were the actual and estimated actual savings, and estimated savings in each year of the forward estimates, not included in the 2010–2011 State Budget?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5189

Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Please refer to Appendix 5 of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, pages 109-111, for a breakdown by agency of the Capital Works Audit savings. (b) As part of the 2009-10 Mid-year Review, all Capital Works Audit savings were reflected in agencies' ongoing budget allocations. That is, these savings are now reflected in the base allocation of all relevant agencies. On this basis, there is considered to be no ongoing need to specifically highlight and report Capital Works Audit savings. Having rolled out these savings, the Department of Treasury and Finance's focus is ensuring that agencies operate within their overall approved financial parameters. PUBLIC SECTOR — RED TAPE REDUCTION — SAVINGS ACHIEVED 3316. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 27 of the 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook describes the ‘Red Tape Reduction and Regulatory Gatekeeping’ initiative. In relation to this, I ask: (a) what savings will be made across the public sector as a result of this initiative; (b) where will these savings be made; (c) when will these savings be made; and (d) where are these savings in the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) The Red Tape Reduction Group and Regulatory Gatekeeping initiatives are designed to reduce unnecessary or unjustifiable regulatory burdens being imposed on business and the community. The 2010-11 Economic and Fiscal Outlook states that the Red Tape Reduction Group recommended reforms with potential benefits of $44 million in a single year to Western Australian businesses and the community. No direct public sector savings are identified in the 2010-11 Budget. (b)-(d) Not applicable. PUBLIC SERVICE — BUDGET — KEY EFFECTIVENESS INDICATORS 3317. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 130 of 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2 presents the following key effectiveness indicators: the extent to which client agencies agree that planning and delivery of new buildings achieved value-for-money; the extent to which client agencies agree that planning and delivery of building maintenance achieved value-for-money; and, the extent to which client agencies agree that their office accommodation has achieved value-for-money. The estimated actual figures for 2009–2010 in the three surveys are approximately half of the budgeted target. I ask: (a) what were the reasons for the estimated actual figures being below the budgeted figure; (b) from page 131, why is value-for-money not perceived as being achieved by agency Chief Executive Officers and asset leaders; and (c) why has the budget target for 2010–2011 not changed for each of these key effectiveness indicators? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) Government's Works Reform program is an initiative to improve the delivery, maintenance and management of its non-residential buildings. The survey scores published in the Department of Treasury and Finance's (DTF) 2010-2011 Budget Papers indicate the level of satisfaction in December 2009 — after six months of the four-year reform program. They therefore represent a baseline for improvement. On the seven-point survey response scale, 35% of Chief Executive Officers and asset leaders were satisfied with the value-for-money achieved by Building Management and Works (BMW), with 42% neutral and 23% negative. (b) As outlined in (a) above, negative responses were received from 23% of the respondent group. The survey collected reasons for dissatisfaction for each of the works service categories. Reasons include cost and time overruns, concerns about project management, and service delivery in the country regions. These concerns, and others, will be addressed under the Works Reform program. The Works Reform Implementation Plan, available on the DTF website, outlines how BMW will implement, evaluate and report on the Works Reform program over the next four years. It gives details of how benefits will be realised and outlines the governance framework to oversee the program.

5190 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(c) Rather than set intermediate, progressive targets, the strategy is to lead with the desired end-state result. The budget targets for 2010-2011 are aspirational and indicative of the satisfaction scores expected at the end of the Works Reform program. It is likely to take several years to achieve this outcome. PUBLIC SERVICE — BUDGET — FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT EMPLOYEES 3318. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 134 of 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2 presents service 6, ‘Evaluation and Planning of Government Service Delivery and Infrastructure Provision’. Why have full-time equivalents under service 6 increased by 27 in 2009–2010, between the budget and estimated actual figure? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: The allocation of 27 additional FTEs to Service 6 is a reflection of the priorities and effort attributed to the Service in 2009/10. PUBLIC SERVICE — BUDGET — PROJECT MANAGEMENT 3319. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 137 of 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2 presents service number 9, ‘Project Management, Coordination and Implementation of the Whole-of-Government Shared Corporate Services Reform’. In relation to this, I ask: (a) how will the reduction of $8,687 in 2010–2011 for the efficiency indicator stated as the delivery of project within budget target be achieved; (b) are there any cost blow-outs anticipated; and (c) what on-going costs (e.g. maintenance) are associated with this? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) The reduction in the indicator between 2009-10 and 2010-11 of $8.737 million (not $8.687 million as stated in the question) is primarily due to the finalisation of the build of the Oracle system in 2010-11. (b) No. (c) Maintenance costs under the whole-of-government contract with Oracle are $3.144 million for 2010- 11. It is noted that these costs are met from Service 10, rather than Service 9. STATE BUDGET 2010-11 — REMOVAL OF SERVICE NO 12 3320. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Why has service number 12, ‘Facilitate the Centre for Excellence and Innovation in Infrastructure Delivery (CEIID)’, presented in the 2009–2010 State Budget, been removed from the 2010–2011 State Budget? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: The "works" functions from the former Department of Housing and Works were transferred into the Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) in February 2009. For the 2009-10 Budget, a revised service structure that incorporated three additional "works" services was introduced. The revised Outcome Based Management (OBM) structure increased the number of services from 12 in 2008-09 to 15 in 2009-10. The Office of the Auditor General (OAG) and other members of the Outcome Structure Review Group (OSRG) expressed concern with the number of key performance indicators (KPIs) in the 2009-10 OBM structure. In this regard, the OSRG endorsed the 2009-10 structure as an interim arrangement, and requested that DTF undertake a further review in 2010-11 with the view to integrating and rationalising the number of services and KPIs. Consistent with this direction, the DTF OBM structure was reviewed, and the 2009-10 services and KPIs were rationalised on the basis of better service alignment and materiality between services and functions. As a result, the former service 12 "Facilitate the Centre for Excellence and Innovation in Infrastructure Delivery (CEIID)" was removed from the 2010-11 OBM structure and incorporated in the new service 11 "Leads the Planning and Delivery of New Government Buildings" (service 13 in 2009-10). Both these services encompass strategic leadership and facilitation in the planning, project management and procurement of new non-residential buildings, and the delivery of value-for-money outcomes. The change does not diminish DTF's focus on the CEIID initiative — rather it aligns it more closely with the "works" services.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5191

POLICE ASSISTANCE CALLS — STATISTICS 3321. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Police Regarding telephone calls made to 131 444 for police assistance or attendance, for each of the years from 2005– 2006 through to, and including, 2009–2010, what was the number of: (a) calls; (b) calls answered; (c) calls abandoned; and (d) calls answered within 20 seconds? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Year (a) (b) (c) (d) 2005/06 381,609 362,065 18,102 326,584 2006/07 460,219 433,929 24,398 370,008 2007/08 521,518 490,794 31,689 406,594 2008/09 531,841 506,040 25,612 431,605 2009/10 508,336 491,178 16,940 451,658 POLICE OFFICERS — NUMBER 3322. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Police What is the number of sworn police officers, by their broad rank structure, serving in Western Australia police for each month from January 2009 to June 2010? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: [See paper 2381.] GRAFFITI TASK FORCE — EXPENDITURES 3323. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Police (1) What are all the expenditures relating to the Graffiti Task Force, specifying all amounts over $5,000, including any administrative costs, for the: (a) 2008–2009 financial year; (b) 2009–2010 financial year; and (c) 2010–2011 proposed budget expenditures? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: The "Graffiti Taskforce" is a steering committee which provides direction and advice in the implementation of the Tough on Graffiti Strategy. Graffiti Task Force funding provided to WA Police, Office of Crime Prevention, for the delivery of the Tough on Graffiti Strategy, is defined as including the allocation of grants to not-for-profit community groups and local government for projects related to the Graffiti Strategy. Direct cost consists of the costs allocated to the employment of staff primarily engaged to deliver the graffiti program. Indirect costs include administration and salary costs apportioned to graffiti activities based on the percentage of total office and salary costs. (1) (a) Direct Costs: $1.04m Graffiti Task Force Grants: $0.620m (Attachment A). [See paper 2382.] Salary: $0.420m Note: Due to the combined funding for activities of the Designing Out Crime and the Graffiti program is not possible to isolate the direct operational costs for the graffiti program in this financial year. Indirect costs: $0.213m (b) Direct Costs: Graffiti Task Force Grants: $0.483m (Attachment B). [See paper 2382.] Salary and operating: $0.821m

5192 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Operational Expenses greater than $5,000: Description Cost Graffiti Removal Training subsidy, staff training $8,713 Graffiti Forum (held in June 2008) and East Metro Graffiti Forum $24,244 Graffiti Strategy evaluation $50,550 Website development GG website/online forum $7,800 OARS database $17,068 Juvenile Clean up Program $44,567 Graffiti Management Toolkit $7,600 Grants promotion/hotline & website resource development $24,374 Goodbye Graffiti brochures and posters $9,700 Graffiti Forum (held in June 2008) $11,220 Rewards Program $5,375 Goodbye Graffiti hotline $138,000 CCTV for Targeted Operations of Graffiti $12,800 Indirect costs: $0.188m Note: variances reflect streamlining of certain activities within Police/ OCP arising from OCP review. (c) Projected Direct Costs: Graffiti Task Force Grants: $0.480m Salary and operating: $0.976m Projected Operational Expenses greater than $5,000: Description Cost PAC and hotline $114,500 Communications $10,000 Juvenile clean-up evaluation $10,000 Database for reporting offences (OARS) $220,000 Juvenile cleanup program $100,000 Royal Show material $10,000 Printing $20,000 MPA skills subsidy (training of graffiti removalists) $5,000 Indirect Costs: At the time of responding to this question, the Office of Crime Prevention is in the process of allocating its budget. At this stage, it is expected that 2010/11 budget will be in line with 2009/10 allocations. COMMUNITY SAFETY AND CRIME PREVENTION PARTNERSHIP FUND 3324. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Police (1) What are all the expenditures, including grants, from the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Partnership Fund, specifying all amounts over $5,000, for the: (a) 2008–2009 financial year; (b) 2009–2010 financial year; and (c) 2010–2011 proposed budget expenditures? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: ‘Community Safety and Crime Prevention Partnership Fund’ is defined as funding assigned as a grant allocation to the Office of Crime Prevention for distribution, by way of grant payments, to not-for-profit organisations and local governments to support crime prevention projects and for the administrative support of that function. (1) (a) Community Safety and Crime Prevention Partnership Funds grants - $2.9m. (Attachment A). [See paper 2383.] Administration costs: A breakdown of administered cost is not possible at this time due to significant changes within the Office of Crime Prevention administration. (b) Community Safety and Crime Prevention Partnership Funds grants - $2.9m (Attachment B). [See paper 2383.] Administration costs: $1.6m

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5193

(c) Community Safety and Crime Prevention Partnership Funds grants - $2.5m Fund Name $m Community Partnership 0.195 Indigenous Partnership 0.230 Local Govt. Partnership 0.650 Leavers 0.300 Special Purpose 0.250 Graffiti Strategy 0.480 Community Safety 0.360 Total 2.465 Projected Administration Costs: $1.2m STATE SUPPLY COMMISSION — COMPLAINTS 3325. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Police (1) Following on from the supplementary information number A45, provided to Estimates Committee A for the 2010–2011 State Budget, how many complaints were received through the State Supply Commission in the following years: (a) 2008–2009; (b) 2007–2008; (c) 2006–2007; (d) 2005–2006; (e) 2004–2005; (f) 2003–2004; (g) 2002–2003; (h) 2001–2002; and (i) 2000–2001? (2) For each of the years listed at (1) above, how many complaints were investigated? (3) For each of the years listed at (1) above, how many complaints were sustained? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: (1)-(3) This question should be referred to the State Supply Commission.

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING – RETIREES WA INCORP — JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT 3327. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Housing I refer to the Department of Housing Joint Venture Agreement with Retirees WA Incorporated, and ask: (1) when did the Department of Housing last audit the resident maintenance funds paid by lease-for-life occupants living in homes on Department of Housing land covered by the Department’s Joint Venture Agreement with Retirees WA Incorporated; (2) is the Minister aware of a recent decision by Retirees WA Incorporated to increase (by about 20%) the amount that Retirees WA Incorporated requires its lease-for-life occupants to pay for what is termed ‘maintenance’; and (3) did Retirees WA Incorporated seek approval from the Department of Housing before increasing its charges to lease-for-life occupants, given that many are aged pensioners? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (1)-(3) The Department of Housing does not audit Retirees WA. Retirees WA are required to comply with the Retirement Villages Act 1992 which specifies the manner in which charges can be levied. Under the Joint Venture Agreement mentioned, the Department provided land and funded construction of the units. The Units are then sold under a Lease for Life to residents as allowed under the RVA. The capital contribution was then repaid to the Department. The expectation of the Agreement is that Retirees WA operates consistent with the Retirement Villages Act and there are no requirements for the Department of Housing to approve charges to Tenants/Residents under their Agreement with Retirees WA.

5194 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

PUBLIC HOUSING — SEWERAGE CONNECTION 3328. Ms J.M. Freeman to the Minister for Water Further to 2010–2011 Budget Estimates supplementary information number A53: (1) where are the 457 properties where no sewerage line is available; and (2) where are the 64 properties where sewerage is scheduled within the next five years? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please Refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3329. PUBLIC HOUSING — SEWERAGE CONNECTION 3329. Ms J.M. Freeman to the Minister for Housing Further to 2010–2011 Budget Estimates supplementary information number A53: (1) where are the 457 properties where no sewerage line is available; and (2) where are the 64 properties where sewerage is scheduled within the next five years? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (1) Ashfield, Balga, Cullacabardee, Doubleview, Embleton, Innaloo, Morley, Mullaloo, Nollamara. (2) Morley, Embleton, Balga, Nollamara, Doubleview, Innaloo, Ashfield, Cullacabardee, Mullaloo. NOLLAMARA ELECTORATE — UNSEWERED AREAS 3330. Ms J.M. Freeman to the Minister for Water In the suburbs of Nollamara, Mirrabooka, Koondoola, Alexander Heights and Dianella: (a) how many areas are unsewered; and (b) will the Minister advise the locations/addresses of each unsewered area? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) All residential properties have sewers available for connection in the suburbs of Nollamara, Mirrabooka, Koondoola, Alexander Heights and Dianella. (b) Not applicable. DEPARTMENT OF WATER — COMMON REGISTRATION SYSTEM 3331. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Water For the Common Registration System (CRS) being developed by the Department of Water: (a) what are the stages and completion dates planned for the development of the CRS; (b) what are the expected outcomes on completion of each stage of the CRS; (c) what are the budgeted costs for each stage; and (d) how much money is the Commonwealth or its agencies contributing to each stage? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) The planned completion date for the Common Registry System (CRS) is September 2012. (b) On completion, the CRS will: • Record water entitlements • Support timely and low cost water transfers • Support faster processing of temporary trades • Provide improved information dissemination for water market participants to protect the interests of buyers and sellers. (c) The Department of Water is not contributing funds to the development of the CRS. (d) The CRS is a component of the National Water Market System which is being funded by the Australian Government through the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA). The total budget to establish the National Water Market System is $56 million (the CRS is one part of this). The DEWHA is beginning a tender process for services to design and develop the CRS. Anticipated costs for each component of the National Water Market System are commercially sensitive at this time.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5195

REGIONAL FLOOD MITIGATION — FUNDING SOURCE 3333. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Water (1) Why does the 2010–2011 State Budget have zero allocation to ‘Regional Flood Mitigation’ on page 740 of Budget Paper No. 2? (2) Has this program been discontinued; and (a) if so, why? (3) Are Commonwealth funds still available to help meet the cost of flood mitigation work; and (i) if so, have there been any applications for Commonwealth funding; and (A) if so, what was requested and how much was granted in 2008–2009 and 2009–2010? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (1) There is no allocation for 2010-2011. (2) No (a) Not applicable (3) Yes (i) The Department of Water intends to seek funding in 2010-2011 once the program is advertised and application forms become available. (A) In 2008-2009, approximately $900 000 of Federal Government Natural Disaster Mitigation Program funding was granted for flood mitigation projects in WA. In 2009-2010, the Natural Disaster Resilience Program funding was not available and consequently an increased level of funding will be available in 2010-2011. WATER SERVICES BILL — CABINET APPROVAL 3334. Mr J.C. Kobelke to the Minister for Water (1) What was the date of Cabinet approval to draft the Water Services Bill? (2) What was the date of Cabinet approval to draft the Water Services Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill? (3) Has Cabinet yet approved drafting of the Water Resources Management Bill; and (i) if so, on what date was approval to draft given? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (1)-(3) As the former Cabinet Minister would be aware, matters pertaining to the Cabinet process are subject to confidentiality laws. Details of future legislation will be released in due course. SOCIAL HOUSING — NUMBER IN GOSNELLS AREA 3335. Mr C.J. Tallentire to the Minister for Housing (1) Can the Minister advise whether there will be a net increase of social housing in Western Australia following the transfer of 559 houses to the community housing sector? (2) How many of the 559 homes to be transferred to the community housing sector are in the following suburbs: (a) Huntingdale; (b) Thornlie; and (c) Gosnells? (3) How much funding will be provided to the community housing sector to conduct maintenance of these properties? (4) Will the rent charged to the tenants in these properties be more than that paid as a tenant of the Department of Housing? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (1) Yes (2) (a) Nil

5196 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) Nil (c) 16 (3) The rental incomes generated from the housing stock will fund ongoing maintenance of the dwellings. (4) The rents charged to tenants will be affordable with rental rates being similar to public housing ie. 25% of income plus Centrelink Rent Assistance or below 75% of the market rent, dependent on circumstances. UNDERGROUND POWER PROGRAM — CITY OF MELVILLE 3336. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy As part of Round 5 of the State Underground Power Program, Attadale North made a submission through the City of Melville which included documented support indicating that over 500 residents and more than 400 homes supported the installation of underground power. It is understood from initial feedback from the City of Melville that Attadale North’s submission was one of 89 submissions and that it was not selected as one of the 20 shortlisted submissions. This is very difficult to understand when, in Round 4, Attadale North was shortlisted and the latest submission demonstrates overwhelming community support and the ability to pay. Could the Minister please provide: (a) details of the evaluation criteria for evaluating Round 5 submissions for underground power, including both: (i) technical; and (ii) non-technical criteria; (b) details of any weighting applied to the evaluation criteria in (a) above; (c) details of the scoring system applied to the submissions, including a description for each score value applied; (d) details of the methodology used in evaluating submissions for underground power in Round 5, including how: (i) evaluations were conducted; (ii) submissions were shortlisted; and (iii) submissions were selected for Round 5 funding; (e) specifically, in respect to the Attadale North submission, a copy of the evaluation spreadsheets, including scores/weighted scores and any written commentary, and a copy of the comparative statement for the overall evaluation of the 89 submissions; and (i) if this cannot be provided, please detail: (A) the reasons why; and (B) to whom a freedom of information (FOI) submission should be made to seek such information under FOI? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a)-(b) The evaluation criteria are provided in the Major Residential Projects Round Five Guidelines, which are publicly available. (c) The evaluation process is still in progress. As set out in the Major Residential Projects Round Five Guidelines, once the evaluation process is finalised and the Minister for Energy has approved the recommended short and reserve list, all local governments will be given the opportunity to be debriefed on any of their proposals that were unsuccessful. (d) (i)-(iii) The Evaluation Methodology is outlined in the Major Residential Projects Round Five Guidelines, which are publicly available. However, please note that the evaluation process is still in progress and, at this stage, no projects have been selected for funding. (e) (i) The evaluation process is still in progress. As set out in the Major Residential Projects Round Five Guidelines, once the evaluation process is finalised and the Minister for Energy has approved the recommended short and reserve list, all local governments will be given the opportunity to be debriefed on any of their proposals that were unsuccessful. (A) The evaluation process is still in progress. (B) The Director Corporate Services of the Office of Energy.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5197

UNDERGROUND POWER SUBSTATIONS — LOCATION 3338. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy Could the Minister please list the location of each of the underground power substations in Western Australia? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Western Power does not have underground power substations. OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT — “WHO BUYS WHAT” REPORT 3339. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Treasurer The Office of Government Procurement produces an annual report titled Who Buys What. This annual report is released into the public domain; however, the report for 2008–2009 has not yet been made publicly available. I ask: (a) on what date will the 2008–2009 Who Buys What report be released into the public domain; (b) what are the specific reasons for the 2008–2009 report not being released to date; (c) will the information be relevant despite being released almost 12 months after the end of the reporting period; and (d) will the Treasurer guarantee that the quarterly reports for Who Buys What will be released within one month of the end of each quarter (for example, the Public Sector Commission already releases quarterly reports in the public domain for the public sector workforce); and (i) if not, why not? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) A release date has not been finalised. The report is expected to be available by mid-August. (b) The report relies on returns and information from government agencies and requires a considerable amount of analysis and verification. (c) Yes (d) No (i) It is an annual report. ECONOMIC REGULATION AUTHORITY — BUDGET — ASSET INVESTMENT PROGRAM 3340. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer In relation to the Economic Regulation Authority (ERA) within the 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2: (a) the 2009–2010 State Budget included $143,000 in the forward estimates under the Asset Investment Program – why is this not in the 2010–2011 State Budget; (b) why is property, plant and equipment estimated to decrease by $80,000 in 2010–2011; (c) why is property, plant and equipment estimated to be $3,000 in 2013–2014; and (d) how will the ERA operate with this minimal level of property, plant and equipment in 2013–2014? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) A TIMS (Treasury Information Management System) entry error made within the ERA in 2009-10 incorrectly removed the ERA's Asset Investment Program in the forward estimates. In loading the journal in TIMS to report the audited actual figure for 2008/09, an incorrect adjustment occurred which removed expenditure for asset purchases to an expense item in the out years. This resulted in the ERA not having a capital works program in the out years. As the ERA is a small agency and does not have an annual capital works program the impact of this adjustment was not obvious at the time. This error was corrected after the 2010-11 State Budget estimates were published and the ERA's Asset Investment Program has been reinstated. Once the error was realised, the ERA contacted the Department of Treasury and Finance. To correct the error, the journal in TIMS was reversed in 2009/10. As a result, the $143,000 in the Asset Investment Program for the out years was reinstated. (b) A TIMS entry error made in 2009-10 incorrectly reduced the value of property, plant and equipment by $80,000. This error was corrected after the 2010-11 State Budget estimates were published and the TIMS system now shows property plant and equipment decreasing by $31,000.

5198 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(c) A TIMS entry error made in 2009-10 incorrectly adjusted property, plant and equipment to show an estimate of $3,000 in 2013-14. This error was corrected after the 2010-11 State Budget estimates were published and the TIMS system now shows property plant and equipment as $82,000 in 2013-14. (d) The corrected estimate of $82,000 for property, plant and equipment is sufficient for the Authority to operate in 2013-14. ECONOMIC REGULATION AUTHORITY — BUDGET — FTE EMPLOYEES 3341. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 152 of the 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2 mentions that the Economic Regulation Authority (ERA) utilised four additional full-time equivalents (FTEs) to build capacity and expertise in 2009–2010 and, in relation to this, I ask: (a) what functions did they perform; (b) how were these FTEs hired; (c) does the ERA have the necessary internal capacity and expertise without the on-going utilisation of these extra four FTEs; and (d) when does the ERA plan to review its ongoing FTE needs in 2010–2011? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) Four additional full-time equivalents were utilised by the ERA during 2009-10 in relation to: • Reference functions under Part 5 of the Economic Regulation Authority Act 2003. • Functions referred to in section 36(1) of the Gas Pipelines Access (Western Australia) Act 1998. • Functions given by or under the National Gas Access (WA) Act 2009. (b) In accordance with Public Sector Management Standards, (Recruitment, Selection and Appointment). (c) The ERA's ongoing FTE needs are to be reviewed during 2010-11. In 2009-10 utilisation of the additional four FTEs enabled the Authority to reduce its reliance on external consultants. (d) The review of the ERA's ongoing FTE needs will occur as part of Government's 2010-11 mid-year review process. WESTERN AUSTRALIA — IMPROVED GROWTH AND TAX DEFERRALS 3342. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer In light of the improved growth in Western Australia in the Treasurer’s State Budget, and the deferral of tax measures in the Mid-year Review worth $511 million, I ask: (a) what are the changes in the growth assumptions for Western Australia between the cut-off date for the 2009–2010 Mid-year Review and now; (b) given the timeframe and the changes to the growth assumption in (a), what will each of the two deferrals on transfer duty and payroll tax now be worth as additional revenue; and (c) will the Treasurer continue the deferral of these two tax measures; and (i) if no, where will this additional revenue be spent? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) The growth assumptions in the 2010?11 Budget are more optimistic than those in the 2009?10 mid-year review. The assumptions are detailed in Table 1 on Page 3 of 2010?11 Budget Paper 3: Economic and Fiscal Outlook. A key driver of the revisions to the economic growth assumptions since the mid-year review was the availability of more up-to-date data in the form of the release of 2008?09 Gross State Product data by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This data was released on 22 December 2009 (after the 30 November 2009 mid-year review cut-off date). For comparison, the economic assumptions made for the mid-year review are detailed in Table 3 on Page 5 of the 2009?10 Government Mid-year Financial Projections Statement. (b) The revenue impact of deferring these measures were fully identified and accounted for in the 2009?10 Government Mid-year Financial Projections Statement (a four year impact to 2012–13 of $355 million for the deferral of the abolition of duty on non-real property and $156 million for the

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5199

deferral of payroll tax harmonisation of grouping provisions). These estimates are not remodelled each time new economic forecasts are presented. (c) The deferral of these measures remains unchanged. (i) Revenue from these and other sources are allocated across the delivery of all government services and initiatives, including infrastructure delivery. It is not allocated to specific spending. INFILL SEWERAGE PROGRAM — STATEWIDE AND BRUCE ROCK 3343. Mr F.M. Logan to the Minister for Water Will the Minister provide a list of priority in-fill sewage programs for the years 2010–2011 and advise where Bruce Rock fits into this list? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Announcements of infill sewerage projects for 2010-11 will be made in due course. OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL — BUDGET — RECEIVABLES 3344. Mr B.S. Wyatt to the Treasurer Page 162 of the 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2 shows the balance of receivables for the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) was budgeted in 2009–2010 to be $624,000 and is estimated to be $5.2 million in 2010– 2011. I ask: (a) why are receivables estimated to increase significantly; (b) what is the current capacity of the OAG to manage receivables; (c) what is the OAG’s capacity to manage receivables throughout 2010–2011; and (d) does the Treasurer anticipate any collection problems with this increase in receivables? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (a) Receivables primarily relate to the fees collected from Government agencies for our audit work. These were previously reported as administered transactions however in 2009-10 we moved to a net appropriation funding model which results in the receivables being included in the balance sheet for the Office of the Auditor General. (b) The OAG has strong capacity to manage receivables. The receivables for the Office are primarily from government agencies and as such there is no expectation of default. (c) The OAG has strong capacity to manage receivables throughout 2010-11. Due to the nature of the debtors there is no expectation of default. (d) No, there is no expectation of any collection problems with the increase in receivables. HOUSING — BOND ASSISTANCE LOAN 3345. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Housing I refer to the Department’s bond assistance loan and the requirement that rent cannot exceed 60 per cent of the applicant’s gross income, and ask: (a) when was this requirement last reviewed; and (b) does the State Government intend to alter the requirement given the rising cost of rents, particularly for those individuals who may need to rent on their own due to health reasons? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (a) 2006 (b) The Department is not undertaking a formal review of the rental cost limits. The 60 percent rule seeks to ensure that the Government is not facilitating the placement of low income households into extreme housing stress. The Department monitors housing demand, housing need and eligibility requirements on an ongoing basis to ensure limited resources are targeted at those who need it most.. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING — MEDIA AND ADVERTISING COSTS 3346. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Housing How much was spent by the Department in the following areas for the 2008–2009 and 2009–2010 financial years:

5200 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) media and marketing; (b) advertising; and (c) consultants? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Department of Housing advises: (a) 2008-2009 - $1,028,323 2009-2010 - $703,487 (b) 2008-2009 - $219,239 2009-2010 - $129,473 (c) Please refer to the Six monthly consultants reports tabled in the Legislative Assembly. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRUST — MEMBERSHIP 3347. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development I refer to the appointment of the chair and members of the Regional Development Trust and ask: (a) how many expressions of interest were received; (b) how many expressions of interest were from country residents; (c) who made the appointments; (d) how were the appointments made; and (e) what are the names of all the subsidiary accounts of the Royalties for Regions Fund that the Trust will provide advice on? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) 115. (b) 79. (c) The appointments were made by me pursuant to section 13 of the Royalties for Regions Act 2009 and endorsed by Cabinet. (d) Answered by (c). (e) Pursuant to section 5 of the Royalties for Regions Act 2009, the Royalties for Regions Fund consists of the following subsidiary accounts: - the Country Local Government Fund - the Regional Community Services Fund - the Regional Infrastructure and Headworks Fund - any other account determined by the Treasurer, on the recommendation of the Minister, to be a subsidiary account. ROYALTIES FOR REGIONS PROGRAM — FEASIBILITY AND PILOT STUDIES 3348. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development (1) What is the total number of feasibility or pilot studies completed, or currently being conducted, with funding from Royalties for Regions Funds? (2) What are the names of each of these individual feasibility or pilot studies? (3) What is the individual funding allocation to each of these feasibility or pilot studies? (4) On what date was the feasibility or pilot study completed? (5) For those feasibility or pilot studies completed prior to 1 February 2010, what funding was allocated in the May State Budget towards the project? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (1) In total 55 studies are funded from Royalties for Regions Funds. (2) The studies are: 1 Mundijong Industrial Land Feasibility Study 2 National Trust - Hamel Feasibility Study

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5201

3 Department of Agriculture and Food - Identify Precinct Sites 4 Harvey Water - Peel Wastewater Pipeline Project 5 Murdoch University - Soil Carbon Evaluation for a Carbon Economy 6 Mid West Academy of Sport Feasibility Study 7 Mid West Emergency Helicopter Feasibility Study 8 Tardun Facility Feasibility Study 9 Bidi Bidi Centre and Programs - Supporting Mothers - 2 year Pilot Project 10 Scoping exercise to assess the need for a residential alcohol and drug facility 11 Ningaloo Research Centre - Architectural Concept and Business Plan 12 Carnarvon New Airport Feasibility Study 13 Exmouth Multi-Purpose Community Centre Business Plan 14 Gascoyne Junction Community Resource Centre 15 Bejaling Port Investigation 16 Shark Bar Community Recreation Centre Feasibility Study 17 Aurox Pilbara Water Re-Use Initiative 18 Town of Port Hedland - Coastal Access and Management Plan/Study 19 Wangka Maya Pilbara Aboriginal Language Community Art and Cultural Centre Feasibility Study 20 Desert Knowledge Australia - remoteFOCUS Pilbara Project/Study 21 Pardoo Station Irrigated Cattle Fodder Production of 40ha Pilot Program 22 Giant Leap International Dance Festival Feasibility Plan 23 Porongorup Range Chairlift Feasibility Study and Business Plan 24 Regional Archival Repository Feasibility Study 25 Future Hawthorne House Project Feasibility Study and Business Plan 26 Kendenup Multipurpose Community Function and Recreation Centre Building Feasibility Study and Marketing Plan 27 Establishing an Albany Small to Medium Sized Multi Species Abattoir Feasibility Study 28 Northam Community Primary Care Centre Scoping Study 29 Innovation for Education (Part - Higher Education and Indigenous Employment) 30 New Regional Library & West End Culture Precinct (Part) Feasibility Study 31 Trail Demonstration of Oil Mallee Biomass Processing Plant 32 Comprehensive Wheatbelt Drainage Program Business Case Preparation 33 Carnarvon Artesian Basin Advisory Group, Pastoral Diversification Business Case 34 Gascoyne Irrigation Pipeline Business Case 35 Jigalong Water Feasibility Study (conducted by Sinclair Knight Merz) 36 The Pilbara Integrated Water Supply Prefeasibility Study 37 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Citic Pacific (Pastoral Land Management Pty Ltd) - DAFWA Biodiesel and Cattle Feed Plants Replace Noxious Weeds by Using Pilbara Water Efficiently 38 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Fortescue Metals Group (FMG) - Worley Parsons - MWH - Evaluation of the Feasibility of a Solomon Sustainable Water Scheme 39 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Leighton Contractors - Pilbara Bottled Water Project 40 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Global Groundwater - DAFWA - MWH - Integrated Mining and Irrigated Agriculture Water Management Study 41 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Ngarliyarndu Bindirri Aboriginal Corporation - Decca Station Water Project 42 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Ashburton Aboriginal Corporation - Nameless Sustainable Energy Project 43 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Consolidated Minerals Woodie Biofuels Project 44 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Aurox Resources Ltd - Balla Balla Water Reuse Initiative Feasibility Study 45 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: West Australia Top Environmental Resource (WATER) Mobile Pipe Machine 46 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: Department of Water Groundwater Resource Appraisal

5202 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

47 Pilbara Water Opportunity Pilot Trials: AgGrow Energy Resources Pty Ltd (AER) Energy Island Pilot Project 48 Broome Shire Council Finger Jetties Study 49 Halls Creek Shire Council - Civic Project Expansion 50 Mangkaja Arts Gallery Feasibility Study 51 Yawoorrong MG Corporation - Identifying Recreational and Tourism opportunities 52 South West Men's Emergency Accomodation Service Feasibility Study 53 Greenbushes Telecenter Feasibility Study and Business Plan 54 Boyup Brook Industrial Land Feasibility Study 55 Northcliffe Sewerage and Wastewater Reuse Feasibility Study (3) The studies are receiving the following funding: 1 $18 000 2 $9 990 3 $50 000 4 $51 845 5 $133 350 6 $20 000 7 $35 000 8 $9 500 9 $399 488 10 $70 000 11 $145 000 12 $250 000 13 $100 000 14 $10 000 15 $120 000 16 $250 000 17 $75 000 18 $50 000 19 $147 300 20 $341 600 21 $140 000 22 $4 000 23 $38 800 24 $20 000 25 $31 000 26 $7 100 27 $5 000 28 $82 090 29 $20 000 30 $34 000 31 $85 000 32 $30 124 33 $75 000 34 $13 200 35 18 098.25 36 $89 580.75 37 $133 825 38 $445 000 39 $425 000 40 $400 000 41 $166 069

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5203

42 $150 000 43 $250 000 44 $480 000 45 $50 000 46 $155 000 47 $250 000 48 $20 000 49 $50 000 50 $19 800 51 $120 000 52 $22 590 53 $5 548 54 $19 000 55 $50 000 (4) The following studies have been completed: 6 June 2010 13 May 2010 14 January 2010 17 March 2010 34 March 2009 35 June 2010 36 May 2009 49 Mid February 2010 51 January 2010 54 January 2010 (5) For those studies completed prior to 1 February 2010, the following funding was allocated in the May State Budget towards the project: 14 $0 34 $7.565 million ($6 million in 2010–11 and $1.565 million in 2011–12) 36 $0 51 $0 54 $0 PUBLIC SECTOR — VEHICLE FLEET 3349. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier I refer to the Premier’s claims in early 2009 that he would cut the number of State Government-supplied vehicles, and ask: (a) what has been the total reduction in the number of State Government-supplied cars since the Premier’s announcement last year that the number of cars would be reduced; (b) what was the total number of cars in the State Government car fleet as at 1 January 2009; (c) what was the total number of cars in the State Government car fleet as at 1 May 2009; (d) what was the total number of cars in the State Government car fleet as at 1 May 2010; (e) what has been the reduction in the number of cars supplied to individual ministerial office staff since 1 May 2009; (f) what was the number of State Government-supplied cars in each agency responsible to the Premier as at 1 May 2009; and (g) what was the number of State Government-supplied cars in each agency responsible to the Premier as at 1 May 2010? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Please refer Legislative Council Question on Notice 2089.

5204 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3350. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development Could the Premier please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: For the period 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010 the Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises for the Office of the Premier: (a) 2 (b) (c) (d) Premier's Office Book from Defence and Foreign Affairs: Global Information Systems $40 No Wine from Australian Property Institute $60 No

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3351. Mr M. McGowan to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs Could the Deputy Premier please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: No (a)-(d) Not applicable.

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3352. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5205

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3353. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: Yes. (a) 2 (b) (c) (d) Bottle of wine from SkyWest $25.00 No Bottle of wine from SkyWest $25.00 No MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3354. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Education; Tourism Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within her ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: From 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010: No. (a)-(d) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3355. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: (a) Please refer to part (b). (b) (c) (d) Hamper from ARG Less than $50 No Wine (two bottles) from Swan Taxis Less than $50 No Necktie from ComfortDelGro Corporation Limited Less than $50 No

5206 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3356. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Since 1 December 2009 no gifts have been accepted by any of my ministerial staff from a private company or individual. (a)-(d) Not applicable

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3357. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: (a) One. Please refer to part (b). (b) (c) (d) Bottle of Wine from WA Turf Club $20.00 No

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3358. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a) 2 (b) 2 Baskets of local produce from Yanchep area, gifted by the Yanchep Beach Joint Venture - included a local bottle of wine, bottle of virgin olive oil and locally made chocolate. (c) Value undetermined, but less than $100.00. (d) No.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5207

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3359. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Nil. (b)-(d) Not applicable.

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3360. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services Could the Attorney General please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (1) No (a)-(d) Not applicable

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3361. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within her ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: (1) No (a)-(d) Not applicable

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3362. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Water; Mental Health Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual;

5208 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a) Please refer to part (b). (b) (c) (d) Movie voucher from Madman entertainment $ 30 No Ticket to attend a rugby match from Synovate $150 No MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3363. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: The following answer refers to the date period of 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. Nil (a)-(d) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3364. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: (a)-(d) No. Ministerial Officers have not received gifts from private companies or individuals however on occasion, for example on Ministerial overseas trips, staff accompanying the Minister may receive trinkets/mementos of no significant value such as business card holders, small animal figurines as a token of welcome/appreciation. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3365. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within her ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift;

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5209

(c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Nil (a)-(d) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3366. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer Could the Minister please advise in relation to staff within his ministerial office, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: No Ministerial Officers have received gifts from private companies or individuals since the date the office of the Hon Bill Marmion MLA, Minister for Commerce; Housing; Science and Innovation came into existence.. PUBLIC SECTOR —ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3368. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Premier’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Premier’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Premier’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Premier’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet: (a)-(b) Department of the Premier and Cabinet (c)-(d) Not applicable Public Sector Commissioner: (a)-(b) Public Sector Commission (c)-(d) Not applicable Department of State Development: (a)-(b) Not applicable. (The Department of State Development does not have an asbestos register or management plan). (c) The Department of State Development. (i) The Department's accommodation on Levels 6 and 7 at 1 Adelaide Terrace, East Perth and the overseas offices are captured in the Department of Mines and Petroleum Asbestos Register. (d) The Department of State Development.

5210 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(i) The Department's accommodation on Levels 6 and 7 at 1 Adelaide Terrace, East Perth and the overseas offices are captured in the Department of Mines and Petroleum Asbestos Management Plan. Acting Commissioner of the Public Sector Standards: (a) Office of the Public Sector Standards Commissioner has an asbestos register. The building manager, Jones Lang LaSalle has advised that they keep a Hazardous Materials Management Register. (b) Office of the Public Sector Standards Commissioner has an Asbestos Management Plan. (c)-(d) Not applicable Gold Corporation: (a)-(b) Gold Corporation (c)-(d) Not applicable Lotterywest: (a)-(b) Lotterywest (c)-(d) Not applicable GESB GESB is a tenant in Central Park. Central Park conducts regular audits and have confirmed there is no asbestos on levels 4 and 5 of the Central Park building where GESB is situated. Therefore, GESB as a tenant does not maintain an asbestos register or management plan (a)-(d) Not Applicable Office of the Auditor General (a)-(d) With respect to the Office of the Auditor General the asbestos register and asbestos management plans are maintained by the Dumas House Management. Department of Treasury and Finance (a) The Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) has a comprehensive register of properties containing asbestos. (b) The DTF has an asbestos management plan. (c)-(d) Not applicable. Western Australian Treasury Corporation Western Australian Treasury Corporation does not own any buildings and therefore this question is not applicable. (a)-(d) Not Applicable Insurance Commission of WA (a)-(d) The Insurance Commission of WA has an asbestos register and an asbestos management plan in relation to its investment properties. PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3369. Mr M. McGowan to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5211

Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) Department of Indigenous Affairs, Department of Health, Nurses and Midwives Board of Western Australia and Office of Health Review. (b) Department of Health and Office of Health Review. (c) (i) Healthway — Healthway operates from a single leased premise. A due diligence was undertaken by a property consultant at the time of entering into the lease. Healthway is of the understanding there is no asbestos in the building. Maintaining an asbestos register or management plan is therefore considered unnecessary. (d) (i) Department of Indigenous Affairs — There are no asbestos risk areas in DIA workplaces. Nurses and Midwives Board of Western Australia — Currently in development. Healthway — See (c)(i)

PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3370. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: DEPARTMENT OF MINES & PETROLEUM (a) The Department of Mines and Petroleum has an asbestos register. (b) The Department of Mines and Petroleum has an asbestos management plan. (c)-(d) Not applicable MINERALS & ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA (a)-(b) Not applicable (c) The Minerals and Energy Research Institute of Western Australia consists of 3 only part-time employees and is accommodated within the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) and therefore does not require an asbestos register. The responsibility for establishing an asbestos register would be with the DMP. (d) The Minerals and Energy Research Institute of Western Australia consists of 3 only part-time employees and is accommodated within the Department of Mines and Petroleum and therefore does not require an asbestos management plan. The responsibility for establishing an asbestos management plan would be with the DMP DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES (a)-(d) In conjunction with the Department of Treasury and Finances' Building Management and Works, the Department of Fisheries has asbestos registers and asbestos management plans for its facilities that have been identified as having, or likely to have, asbestos containing material. WESTERN AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION (a)-(b) Not applicable. (c)-(d) Not required — do not own building.

5212 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3371. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: (a) LandCorp, Landgate, Kimberley, Pilbara and Wheatbelt Development Commissions (b) LandCorp, Kimberley, Pilbara and Wheatbelt Development Commissions (c) The Department of Regional Development and Lands, Gascoyne, Mid West, Goldfields Esperance, Great Southern, South West and Peel Development Commissions. (i) - The Gascoyne Development Commission does not own or lease any buildings that contain asbestos, therefore it does not have an asbestos register. - The Goldfields Esperance Development Commission Office lease their office through Building Management and Works who are responsible for this issue. - The Mid West Development Commission is one of a number of tenants in a privately owned building. The building owners have had an asbestos register prepared that satisfies WorkSafe's requirements. - Peel Development Commission. In 2004 an inspection of this agency's leased premises confirmed there were no asbestos related materials in the building. Therefore Department of Housing and Works agreed there was no need for an Asbestos Register or an Asbestos Management Plan. - The Great Southern Development Commission leases the building from Terse Pty Ltd who are responsible for this issue. - The South West Development Commission (SWDC) has three offices: Bunbury, Collie and Manjimup. The Bunbury office is located in the Bunbury Tower and is part of a direct lease between the State Government and the owners. The Bunbury Tower is managed by Colliers International and the current lease expires in 2011. The Department of Housing manages the lease arrangements for both the Manjimup and Collie offices. The SWDC owns the building which houses the Dolphin Discovery Centre although this building does not contain asbestos. - The Department of Regional Development and Lands. Asbestos registers are in place for buildings of which the department is a tenant but are developed and maintained by the relevant building management not the department. (d) The Department of Regional Development and Lands, Landgate, Gascoyne, Mid West, Goldfields Esperance, Great Southern, Peel and South West Development Commissions. (i) - Landgate. As the buildings occupied and utilised by Landgate do not have asbestos, it was deemed that an Asbestos Management Plan is not required. Bunbury Tower has an Action A4 (No remedial action) attributed to it - The Gascoyne Development Commission does not own or lease any buildings that contain asbestos, therefore it does not have a management plan. - The Goldfields Esperance Development Commission Office lease their office through Building Management and Works who are responsible for this issue.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5213

- The Mid West Development Commission is one of a number of tenants in a privately owned building. The building owners have had an asbestos management plan prepared that satisfies WorkSafe's requirements. - Peel Development Commission. In 2004 an inspection of this agency's leased premises confirmed there were no asbestos related materials in the building. Therefore Department of Housing and Works agreed there was no need for an Asbestos Register or an Asbestos Management Plan. - The Great Southern Development Commission leases the building from Terse Pty Ltd who are responsible for this issue. - The South West Development Commission (SWDC) has three offices: Bunbury, Collie and Manjimup. The Bunbury office is located in the Bunbury Tower and is part of a direct lease between the State Government and the owners. The Bunbury Tower is managed by Colliers International and the current lease expires in 2011. The Department of Housing manages the lease arrangements for both the Manjimup and Collie offices. The SWDC owns the building which houses the Dolphin Discovery Centre although this building does not contain asbestos. - The Department of Regional Development and Lands. Asbestos management plans are in place for buildings of which the department is a tenant but are developed and maintained by the relevant building management not the department. PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3373. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: Public Transport Authority (a)-(b) The Public Transport Authority. (c)-(d) Not applicable Main Roads (a)-(b) Main Roads. (c)-(d) Not applicable. Disability Services Commission (a)-(b) Disability Services Commission. (c)-(d) Not applicable Department of Transport (a)-(b) Department of Transport. (c)-(d) Not applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3374. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask:

5214 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Western Australia Police (a) Western Australia Police has an Asbestos Register (b) Western Australia Police has an Asbestos Management Plan (c)-(d) Not applicable FESA (a) The Fire and Emergency Services Authority has an Asbestos Register (b) The Fire and Emergency Services Authority has an Asbestos Management Plan (c)-(d) Not applicable Office of Road Safety The Office of Road Safety is administratively supported as part of Main Roads WA and as such the response will be included on the MRWA response under the Minister for Transport. PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3375. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: (a) Department of Sport and Recreation; VenuesWest; and Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. (b) Department of Sport and Recreation; VenuesWest; and Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. (c) Nil (i) Not Applicable (d) Nil (i) Not Applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3376. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask:

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5215

(a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a)-(d) [See paper 2385.] PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3377. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Office of Energy (a)-(b) Governor Stirling Tower Building Management has and maintains the asbestos register and the asbestos management plan applicable to the Office of Energy. (c)-(d) Not applicable. Department of Training and Workforce Development (a)-(b) The Department of Training and Workforce Development has an asbestos register and asbestos management plan. (c)-(d) Not applicable. Department of Education Services (a)-(b) Nil. (c)-(d) The Department of Education Services leases its premises through the Building Management and Works Branch of the Department of Treasury and Finance. There is no asbestos material on site. PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3378. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Attorney General’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Attorney General’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Attorney General’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and

5216 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Attorney General’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (a) The names of the agencies within the Attorney General's portfolio with an asbestos register are: Department of Corrective Services (specific sites) Director of Public Prosecutions Department of the Attorney General Office of the Information Commissioner (b) The names of agencies within the Attorney General's portfolio with an asbestos management plan are: Department of Corrective Services (specific sites) Director of Public Prosecutions Department of the Attorney General Office of the Information Commissioner (c) The names of the agencies within the Attorney General's portfolio without an asbestos register are: Commissioner for Children and Young People Corruption and Crime Commission of Western Australia Equal Opportunity Commission Law Reform Commission of Western Australia Legal Aid Commission of Western Australia Commissioner for Children and Young People (c)-(d) The agency occupies a single leased property at 1 Alvin St Subiaco that is a modern building that does not contain asbestos. Corruption and Crime Commission of Western Australia (c)-(d) The Commission's asbestos register and management plan is handled by the building managers and reported against directly to the Department of Housing. Department of Corrective Services (c)-(d) The Department of Corrective Services has undertaken an asbestos audit of sites owned and occupied by the Department. Those sites identified as having asbestos have an asbestos management plan and asbestos register. Department of the Attorney General (c)-(d) Not applicable Equal Opportunity Commission of Western Australia (c)-(d) The Commission has been advised that there are no asbestos materials within its premises. CB Richard Ellis holds an asbestos register which identifies two items (relating to fire equipment) located in the common area. Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (c)-(d) The Law Reform Commission of Western Australia is asbestos free, and therefore, does not have an asbestos register or management plan. Legal Aid Commission of Western Australia (c)-(d) Legal Aid WA does not have an asbestos management plan because this issue is managed by the owner of 55 St Georges Terrace, Perth which is a leased multi-tenanted building Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (c)-(d) The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) leases nine floors of International House, 26 St Georges Terrace Perth, which is managed by Knight Frank. As all asbestos was removed from this tenancy prior to ODPP occupation in 2007, there is no requirement for an individual asbestos register or asbestos management plan, however the ODPP Facilities Manager is registered with the Department of Housing and Works as a competent person for undertaking asbestos risk assessments. As there is still asbestos in parts of International House other than floors leased by the ODPP, an asbestos register and

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5217

asbestos management plan is available from Knight Frank and a copy is held by the ODPP. This was last updated in June 2010. OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER (c)-(d) Not applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3379. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: The answer for the Department for Communities which includes Women's Interest; Senior's and Volunteers is; (a)-(b) Department for Communities (c)-(d) Not applicable Department for Child Protection (a)-(b) Department for Child Protection (c)-(d) Not applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3380. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Water; Mental Health I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a)-(b) Aqwest, Busselton Water Board, The Drug and Alcohol Office, The Department of Water and the Water Corporation. (c)-(d) The Mental Health Commission does not have a separate asbestos register or management plan. In line with the transition to a separate agency, compliance by the Mental Health Commission with whole of government policies such as Asbestos Management continues to be met by the Department of Health. PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3381. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask:

5218 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: (a) Metropolitan Cemeteries Board and National Trust of Australia (Western Australia) have their own asbestos register. (b) Metropolitan Cemeteries Board has an asbestos management plan. The National Trust of Australia (West Australia) has a Draft Asbestos Management Plan. The data has been provided to Building Management and Works for entry into its database in addition to that previously provided through the desktop audit. (c)-(d) The Department of Local Government including the Office of Multicultural Interests is a tenant of Dumas House. An asbestos register and asbestos management plan is maintained by the Facilities Manager on behalf of the Tenants and Building Management and Works - the Department of Treasury and Finance. The Heritage Council of Western Australia leases its accommodation from the Department of Housing. As the owner of the building the Department of Housing is responsible for the asbestos register and asbestos management plan. PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3382. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and (i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: (a)-(b) Department of Agriculture and Food and Forest Products Commission (c)-(d) Not applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3384. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer I refer to the response to a question from the former Treasurer that the responsibility for establishing asbestos registers and asbestos management plans rests with individual State Government agencies, and ask: (a) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos register; (b) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that have an asbestos management plan; (c) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos register; and

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5219

(i) why not; and (d) what are the names of the agencies within the Minister’s portfolio that do not have an asbestos management plan; and (i) why not? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: SBDC (a)-(d) The Small Business Development Corporation (SBDC) does not have a current asbestos register or asbestos management plan. The SBDC is scheduled to move premises shortly (December 2010) and an asbestos register and asbestos management plan will be established at that time. WAIRC (a)-(d) The Department of the Registrar, WA Industrial Relations Commission does not have an asbestos register or management plan. The asbestos register is maintained by Becton Investment Management, the owner of the building at 111 St Georges Terrace Perth, of which the Department is a tenant. The asbestos register is controlled by the building management. The tenancy fit out which is the responsibility of the Department, is asbestos free. An asbestos management plan is maintained by the building owner Becton Investment Management. In the event of the plan being implemented the Department, as a tenant, would be compliant with the requirements of the plan. WorkCover (a)-(d) WorkCover WA do not have an asbestos management plan because the building was built in 1990. Architects have advised that they believe no asbestos was used in construction. A Preliminary Site Investigation in June 2008 found no trace of asbestos on site. ChemCentre (a)-(d) The building was only completed in October 2009. ChemCentre do not have asbestos in the building, nor do they own the building. Dept of Commerce (a)-(d) The Department of Commerce has an asbestos management plan and asbestos register. Dept of Housing (a)-(d) The Department of Housing has a comprehensive register of properties containing asbestos. The Department of Housing has an Asbestos Management Plan. PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3385. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development Could the Premier please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet: (a) Please refer to answer part (b). (b)-(d) [See paper 2376.] Public Sector Commissioner: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable Department of State Development: (a) 6

5220 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b)-(d) [See paper 2376.] Acting Commissioner of the Public Sector Standards; Gold Corporation; Lotterywest: (a) None (b)-(d) Not applicable Department of Treasury and Finance: (a) 17 (b)-(d) [See paper 2376.] Insurance Commission of WA: (a) 15 (b)-(d) [See paper 2376.] Government Employees Superannuation Board: (a) 4 (b)-(d) [See paper 2376.] Office of the Auditor General: (a) 9 (b)-(d) [See paper 2376.] Western Australian Treasury Corporation: (a) Please refer to answer part (b). (b)-(d) [See paper 2376.]

PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3386. Mr M. McGowan to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs Could the Deputy Premier please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Information provided for the period 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. Department of Indigenous Affairs and Office of Health Review (a) Nil. (b)-(d) Not applicable. Department of Health (a) 85. (b)-(d) [See paper 2379.] Nurses and Midwives Board of Western Australia (a) 5. (b) Gift (c) $ (d) Relationship 2 Movie Tickets - South Metro Area Health Service $30 No Bottle of wine - Grant Thornton $20 No Bottle of wine - Maliforce $20 No Hamper - Sparke Helmore Lawyers $100 No Bottle of wine - Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital $20 No

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5221

Healthway (a) One. (b) Gift (c) $ (d) Relationship Picnic rug from WA Football Commission $45 Yes 2 Bottles of wine from Rugby WA $50 Yes PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3387. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: DEPARTMENT OF MINES & PETROLEUM (a) Three (b) (c) (d) 2010 diary from Inpex Corporation Less than $25 No Two bottles of wine from Coakes Consulting $25 - $100 No Bottle of wine from Tenement Wide Services $15 - $20 No 2010 diary from the Aditya Birila Group Less than $25 No Invitation to dinner presentation from CISCO $25 - $100 Yes Tie from STX Group Korea Less than $25 No Book from CITIC Pacific Mining $25 - $100 No Note: The DMP Conflict of Interest policy permits employees to accept one-off gifts where the gift is of token value (less than $25) and the acceptance does not breach any section of the policy. Gifts of token value are not required to be declared. DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES (a) Three. (b) (c) (d)

Christmas Cake $10 yes Meal from Mark Ridgeway & Sorin Toma $20 no Bottle of wine from Fisheries Research and Development Council $25 yes 1kg cooked prawns from MG Kailis $20 yes 2 bottles wine from MG Kailis $36 yes Lunch invitation from Australia Post $125 yes Breakfast from N Kailis $14 yes Meal (dinner) from Fisheries Research Advisory Board Unknown yes Meal (dinner) from Abacus Fisheries Unknown yes Meal (lunch) from Recfishwest $30 yes Tickets to a play from Committee for Economic Development of Australia Unknown yes Meal (lunch) from UWA $110 yes Penlight from Australian Rural Leadership Program $10 no Chocolates from United Midwest Professional Fishers Association $15 yes

5222 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

WESTERN AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION (a)-(d) Nil. MINERALS & ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA (a)-(d) Nil. PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3388. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: Yes (a) 9 (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Commemorative Model Car from Event $55 Yes - Event Assist received a Grant from the Assist Inc Commission for $17,500 to host two events; All Australian Car Day and the British Auto Classic. All sponsors received this gift. Spray Jacket from Clipper Ventures $50 No 320 GB External Hard Drive from Hitachi $100.00 No Customer satisfaction gift voucher for $200 $200.00 No from Qantas Wine from Computer Sciences Corporation $50.00 Yes (CSC) Wine from BGC (Australia) $50.00 Yes Wine from Linc Integrated $60.00 Yes Wine from BGC (Australia) $40.00 Yes 2 x Rotary Ball Tickets from BHPBIO $200.00 Yes

PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3389. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Education; Tourism Could the Minister please advise for each agency within her portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: Department of Education (a) Nine officers above 7.1 within the Department of Education's central and district offices have accepted a gift from a private company or individual. (b)-(d) From 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5223

(b) (c) (d) Company promotional keyring from Alesco/Talent 2. $2.00 No Bottle of wine from the Western Australian Managers of Business $10.00 No in Education. Bunch of flowers from parents of students participating on the $40.00 No Premier's ANZAC Student Tour 2010. Promotional pen from Morcombe Travel. $5.00 Yes Tickets from Black Swan State Theatre Company. $98.00 No Ticket from Perth Theatre Trust and His Majesty's Theatre. $60.00 Yes Two (2) bottles of wine from the Western Australian District High $30.00 No Schools Administrators' Association. Bottle of wine from the Catholic Education Office. $15.00 No Flowers and stationery compendium from Teachers' Credit Union. $160.00 No Bottle of wine from the Western Australian Education Support $15.00 No Principals' and Administrators' Association. Country High School Hostels Authority (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable. Public Education Endowment Trust (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable. Curriculum Council (a) Five officers above 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual. (b)-(d) From 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010: (b) (c) (d) Basket of confectioneries from Notre Dame University $50.00 Yes 2 tickets A reserve to Hopman Cup from Cannon $90.00 Yes 2 tickets A reserve to Hopman Cup from Cannon $90.00 Yes Bunch of flowers from Notre Dame University $50.00 Yes 2 tickets A reserve to Hopman Cup from Cannon $90.00 Yes Gift Voucher from Classroom Video $50.00 No Gift Voucher from Classroom Video $50.00 No Department of Education Services (a) Please refer to answer (b)-(d) (b)-(d) From 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010: (b) (c) (d) Wine gift pack from Anglican Schools Commission $30.00 Yes Business card holder from Australian Universities Quality Agency $45.00 Yes Angus and Robertson gift voucher from Association of Independent $50.00 Yes Schools WA Tourism WA (a) Please refer to answer (b)-(d). (b)-(d) From 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010 (b) (c) (d) Clock from Managing Director Prima Prai Goup (Malaysia) $100.00 No USB Modem with 15GB download from Vivid Technologies $100.00 No It should be noted that the clock was not retained by the individual, it was handed to Tourism Western Australia's Social Club. Rottnest Island Authority (a) Please refer to answer (b)-(d) (b)-(d) From 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010

5224 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(b) (c) (d) Gift Basket from ISS Australia. $45.00 Yes 2 Bottles of Wine from Bird Cameron. $45.00 No Pewter Mug from National Trust for Historic Preservation, USA. $25.00 No PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3390. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: Public Transport Authority The Public Transport Authority's Code of Conduct Policy provides that any employee who accepts a gift valued at $30 or more must declare and register that gift. Accordingly, this Policy has been used to formulate the Authority's response below in relation to Officers at level 7.1 or above. (a) 14. (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Food hamper from Westnet Rail > $30.00 Yes Food hamper from Health for Industry > $30.00 Yes Lunch provided by the Australian Transit Group > $30.00 Yes Food hamper from Westnet Rail $100.00 Yes Food hamper from South West Coachlines > $30.00 Yes Food hamper from John Holland $60.00 Yes Book from Speno $50.00 Yes Wine from Ansaldo STS Australia $60.00 Yes Food hamper from Westnet Rail $60.00 Yes Book and wine from Speno $60.00 Yes Food hamper from Western Diagnostics > $30.00 Yes Lunch provided by Mallensons Stephen Jaques $80.00 Yes Lunch provided by Mallensons Stephen Jaques $80.00 Yes Football game and lunch provided by Burgess Rawson $90.00 Yes Football game and lunch provided by Burgess Rawson $90.00 Yes Football game and lunch provided by Burgess Rawson $90.00 Yes Lunch provided by Spotless Catering $50.00 Yes Charity ball ticket provided by MSS Security $100.00 Yes Main Roads (a) Please refer to answer part (b). (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Gift certificate from CPA $50.00 No Gift basket from Process Minerals International $450.00 No Wine from Fuji Xerox Australia $30.00 Yes Gourmet food basket from Empired Limited $170.00 Yes Disability Services Commission (a) None. (b)-(d) Not applicable.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5225

Department of Transport (a) Four (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Bottle of Red Wine from ARG $90.00 No Assortments of Condiments from Broome $30.00 No Airport Holdings Bottle of Red Wine from ARG $90.00 No Assortments of Condiments from Broome $30.00 No Airport Holdings Business card holder from Mitsui & Co Ltd $15.00 No Invitation to attend football match in $100.00 Yes company provides ad hoc corporate stand — Eagles St Kilda game accounting and advisory services from Stantons International to the Department of Transport PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3391. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Western Austalia Police (a) Please refer to part (b). (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Two bottles of wine from SAS Telecom $30.00 Yes Leeuwin Concert package from Telstra Value undetermined Yes One bottle of wine from AIIA Symposium $20.00 No Two bottles of wine from SEME $30.00 Yes Four bottles of wine from Oldfield Knott Architects Pty Ltd $60.00 Yes Bottle of Wine from Profectus Australia Pty Ltd $10.00 Yes FESA Since 1 December 2009 no FESA officer above the level of 7.1has accepted any gifts from a private company or individual. (a)-(d) Not applicable Office of Road Safety The Office of Road Safety is administratively supported as part of Main Roads WA and as such the response will be included on the MRWA response under the Minister for Transport. PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3392. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift;

5226 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: DEPARTMENT OF SPORT AND RECREATION (a) One. Please refer to answer (b) (b) (c) (d) Signed framed Western Warriors Print from WA Cricket Association $350 Yes VENUESWEST (a) One. Please refer to answer part (b) (b) (c) (d) One bottle of wine from Urimat Australia $20.00 Yes One bottle of wine from Jasneat $20.00 Yes One bottle of wine from Star Data $20.00 Yes DEPARTMENT OF RACING, GAMING AND LIQUOR (a) One. Please refer to answer part (b) (b) (c) (d) Christmas cake from Integrity Staffing Value undetermined Yes

PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3393. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a) Please refer to answer part (b) (b)-(d) [See paper 2386.]

PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3394. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Office of Energy (a) Please refer to answer to (b). (b)-(d) [See paper 2391.]

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5227

Department of Training and Workforce Development (a) No officers above level 7.1 have accepted gifts. (b)-(d) Not applicable. Department of Education Services (a) Please refer to answer to (b). (b)-(d) [See paper 2391.] PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3395. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services Could the Attorney General please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: For the period of 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. Commissioner for Children and Young People (a) 1 (b) (c) (d) 1 bottle of Wine from Australian College of Children and Young People's Nurses $20 No Corruption and Crime Commission of Western Australia (a) 3 (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) 2 Wine Glasses from Perth Rotary Club $40 No 2 Passes to Attend a Workshop at Legalwise $880 No 2 Books from Colleen Egan $65.98 No Department of Corrective Services (a) 2 (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Conference Registration (Ideaction Australian National $2395 No Conference) from Steve Vindon, Program Facility Management Leeuwin Concert 2010 from Telstra $400 No Department of the Attorney General The Gifts, Benefits and Other Rewards Policy forms part of the Department of the Attorney General's Corruption Prevention Plan. The Policy provides that where a gift, benefit or other reward with a value in excess of $25 had been offered, the business area must ensure that the item is included on the Department's Gift Register and that utilisation should not occur prior to the approval of the delegated authority. The Policy requires that where a staff member is involved in a procurement or tender process, no gifts should be accepted from the advertising of the tender to the closure and appointment of the successful applicant, and that gifts should not be accepted as a reward for having purchased goods or services. Officers from the Department of the Attorney General accepted the following gifts from private companies or individuals between 1 December 2009 and 30 June 2010. The Policy also provides that where the gift is consumable, it may be appropriate for the delegated authority to approve utilisation by sharing with colleagues, and this has generally been the case with the items identified in the table below.

5228 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) 9 (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Fruit basket from PricewaterhouseCoopers $50 Yes Fruit basket from Mercer Funds Management $50 Yes Gift Basket from Appian Group $45 Yes Christmas Hamper from Bay Technologies $40 Yes Food and Wine Hamper from Appian Group $80 Yes 2 Bottles of Wine from Keys Brothers Removalists $70 Yes 2 Boxes of Chocolates from Commonwealth Bank (valued at $25 $50 Yes each) Chocolates from MSS Security $20 Yes Sony Blu Ray Player awarded as door prize by Oracle Australia $400 Yes Six pack of beer from Ajilon $20 Yes Wine and truffle oil from Oldfield Legal $50 Yes Equal Opportunity Commission of Western Australia (a) Nil. (b)-(d) Not applicable Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (a) Nil. (b)-(d) Not applicable Legal Aid Commission of Western Australia (a) 1 (b) (c) (d) Myer Gift Voucher from Craig Coffman and Les Connelly $100 No Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable.

PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3396. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests Could the Minister please advise for each agency within her portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: The answer for the Department for Communities which includes Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests is: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5229

Department for Child Protection (a) 6 (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) 4 x Lunch at Sandalford Winery From: Unisys Australia $100 Yes Bottle of Wine - Barossa Valley - Shiraz Cabernet From: CSG $15 Yes Training Corporate dinner at the old Swan Brewery From Cisco Australia $70 Yes PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3397. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Water; Mental Health Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: For Aqwest: (a) Please refer to answer in part (b) (b) (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) 1x Bottle of Wine from Bunbury Holden $20.00 Yes Training Course Registration (CFO Course) from Strategy $1,495.00 No Group Travel Voucher from Optus $50.00 No Business Lunch from GHD $25.00 Yes Business Lunch from Serck $25.00 Yes Business Dinner from Civica $80.00 Yes Business Dinner from Civica $80.00 Yes For Busselton Water Board: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable For the Mental Health Commission: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable Please Note: For the period 1 December 2009 to 7 March 2010 the Mental Health Division (now known as the Mental Health Commission) formed part of the Department of Health which was in the Minister for Health's portfolio. For the period 1 December 2009 to 30 July 2010 the mental health services in the Area Health Services formed part of the Department of Health and of hospitals boards which are in the Minister for Health's portfolio. As a consequence, information concerning the Mental Health Division and mental health services (provided by Area Health Services) is included in the answer provided in respect of the Department of Health as a whole by the Minister for Health. For the Drug and Alcohol Office: (a) Please refer to answer in part (b) (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Small potted plant from The Brand Agency $20.00 Yes Small potted plant from The Brand Agency $20.00 Yes Small potted plant from The Brand Agency $20.00 Yes

5230 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

For The Department of Water: (a) Please refer to answer in part (b) (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Bottle of Wine from L7 Solutions $20.00 Yes Beach Towel/bag from Australian Institute of Management $25.00 Yes Bottle of Wine from Linc $20.00 Yes Bottle of Wine from Linc $20.00 Yes Calendar, Diary, Pen And Xmas labels from Tyco Water $50.00 No 2 Bottles of wine from Satterleys $50.00 No Portico Quartet Concert from URS $40.00 Yes 1 Bottle of Wine and 1 Coffee Cup from National Centre for $20.00 Yes Groundwater Research Training UDIA Seminar Lunch from Armadale Redevelopment $70.00 No Authority Christmas Lunch from CDM $40.00 Yes Birthday Party x 3 from Velrada $60.00 (total) Yes For Water Corporation: (a)-(d) There are no known breaches in the Water Corporation's Code of Conduct and Standard S199 Ethics and Fair Dealing.

PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3398. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: The following answer refers to the date period of 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. Heritage Council of Western Australia; and National Trust of Australia (Western Australia) No (a)-(d) Not applicable (a) For the Department of Local Government including the Office of Multicultural Interests and Metropolitan Cemeteries Board please refer to parts (b)-(d). (b)-(d) Agency (b) (c) (d) Department of Local Two bottles of Wine from Dawn Lowe - $30.00 No Government including Animals Angels the Office of Tickets to Perth International Arts Festival Multicultural Interests (PIAF) $175.00 No Ticket to African Professionals event and dinner (African Professionals of Australia) $100.00 Yes Metropolitan Cemeteries Dinner at Frazers x 3 - Enabling $80 pp No Board Dinner & Pass Gloucester Park and hamper - $170.00 and Spices Catering & Red Pepper Catering x 2 $30.00 pp A bottle of Wine - RSM Bird Cameron $25.00 Yes Gift Box of Chocolates - Arrow Bronze $60 Yes Lunch - Turfmaster $80 Yes

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5231

BBQ Set - Prospero AutoCAD Services $149.00 Yes A bottle of wine - RSM Bird Cameron $20.00 Yes Dinner - Arrow Bronze $100.00 Yes

PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3399. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: Department of Agriculture and Food; (a) Please refer to part (b) (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Box of Dates United Feed Company (Saudi Arabia) $20 No Case of Mangoes (National Australia Bank) $50 No Bottle of Wine (Vegetables WA Jim Turley) $20 No Forest Products Commission (a) Please refer to part (b) (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Two bottles of wine which were declared in accordance with the relevant $100 No Forest Products Commission polices and procedures. The wine was provided by the Chairman of the An Binh Paper Company

PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3400. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth Could the Minister please advise for each agency within her portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Department of Environment and Conservation (a) Four (b)-(d) [See paper 2392.] Office of the Environmental Protection Authority (a) One (b) (c) (d) Two bottles of wine from Satterley Property Group $50.00 No

5232 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Perth Zoo (a) Two (b)-(d) [See paper 2392.] Office of the Appeals Convenor; Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority; Swan River Trust; Department for Communities, including the Office for Youth (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — GIFT ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3401. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any gift from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted a gift from a private company or individual; (b) if so, what were the gifts, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the gift; (c) if so, what is the estimated individual value of the gift or gifts; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: SBDC (a) From 1 December 2009, one (1) officer above level 7.1 has accepted gifts from a private company or individual. (b) (c) (d) Decorative pen from Esperance Chamber of Commerce $20.00 Yes Decorative trinket box from Korean Business (government) delegation $20.00 No WAIRC (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable WorkCover (a) Please refer to answer part (b) (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Champagne from PwC Australia $80-$100 Yes Gift Voucher from PwC Australia $50 Yes Chocolates from party to a dispute $25 No Fruit hamper from PwC Australia $50 Yes Book from PwC Australia $40 Yes Wine from Grant Thornton $30 Yes Phone sim card from KPMG Value undetermined Yes Jelly Beans from Gel Group $40 Yes ChemCentre (a) Please refer to answer part (b) (b) (c) (d) Memory Stick from Harvard Business Review $20.00 Yes (Suscriber) Golf Voucher from Perth Scientific $200.00 Yes (Purchase of goods) The Department of Commerce (a) 16. (b)-(d)

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5233

Gift (b) Company (b) Value (c) Department (d) Relationship 1 Fruit Cake Integrity Staffing $10 (approx) Yes 1 Fruit Cake Integrity Staffing $10 (approx) Yes One bag of lollies CGU Unknown No 1 Bottle of Wine Sun Microsystems Unknown No Bag of Rock Candy Stuart Webster/Red Source Personnel $10 (approx) Yes 1 Bottle of Wine Brian Voak and Associates $15 Yes 2 Mugs Amcom Telecom $10 (approx) Yes Mino HD Flip Video CISCO $118-$218 No 1 Bottle of Wine IFAP $25 Yes Wine and Chocolate SilverChain $20 No 4 Bottles of Wine Architects Association $70 No Various - Water bottle, Australian Institute of Conveyancers $50 No sports towel, pen, scarf, book, pin Assorted Toiletries Chartered Secretaries Australia $25 No Bottle of Barwick WA Business News $30 No Estate 2007 Shiraz Wine Small Tool kit Access Alliance $25 No Upgrade from business QANTAS Unknown No class to first class Bottle of Wine Judith + Derek Humphries $15 No The Department of Housing (a) Two officers. Please refer to answer parts (b-d) below: (b) (c) (d) Bottle of wine x 2; bottle of Scotch Whisky, from Ferials Painting Services $45.00 Yes Bottle of wine x 2, from Brendan McKenna Maintenance Over $20.00 Yes PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3402. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development I refer the Premier to each department and agency under the Premier’s control, including the Premier’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: I refer the Member to Legislative Assembly Questions on Notice 2905 - 2921 asked by the Leader of the Opposition. • These answers provide the most current details regarding Media staff employed across Government and include: • The total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing, or speechwriting • The salary band for each of these employees; • The job title for each of these employees; and • A breakdown of entitlements these employees receive. It should be noted that in addition to media staff in the Premier's office and across departments, the previous government had established the Community Cabinet Liaison propaganda unit which employed up to 13 people in salary bands ranging from five to nine. This propaganda unit was headed by former Western Australian State President of the Australian Labor Party, Mrs Sharryn Jackson. The cost of this unit was in addition to funding for Ministerial Media Officers and the Government Media Office. As well as this cost, the Labor Government's propaganda unit surreptitiously rented full-time five offices in Albany, Bunbury, Kalgoorlie, Broome and Geraldton for what is understood to have been occasional use for local campaigns.

5234 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

The Liberal-National Government abolished Community Cabinet Liaison propaganda unit, thereby saving taxpayer funds. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3403. Mr M. McGowan to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs I refer the Deputy Premier to each department and agency under the Deputy Premier’s control, including the Deputy Premier’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3404. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3405. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3406. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Education; Tourism I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5235

PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3407. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly question on notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3408. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3409. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3410. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3411. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask:

5236 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3412. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services I refer the Attorney General to each department and agency under the Attorney General’s control, including the Attorney General’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3413. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3414. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Water; Mental Health I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3415. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5237

Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402.. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3416. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3417. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3418. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer I refer the Minister to each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s office, and ask: (a) what is the total number of employees engaged in media, communications, marketing or speechwriting (including public, corporate and media relations); (b) what is the level and salary for each of these employees; and (c) what is the job title for each of these employees? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Please refer to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 3402. PUBLIC SECTOR — EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS 3419. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development Could the Premier please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Office of the Premier advises for the period 1 December 2009 – 30 June 2010.

5238 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) Nil (b) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3420. Mr M. McGowan to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs Could the Deputy Premier please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: No (a)-(d) Not applicable. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3421. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Nil. (b)-(d) Not applicable. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3422. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: Yes. (a) 2 (b) (c) (d) Return air charter from Perth to Busselton with Skywest Airlines $200 No

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5239

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3423. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Education; Tourism Could the Minister please advise in relation to her ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: From 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010: No. (a)-(d) Not applicable

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3424. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: No. (a)-(d) Not applicable.

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3425. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: The response to this question covers the period 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. Nil (a)-(d) Not applicable

5240 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3426. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: No (a)-(d) Not Applicable

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3427. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a)-(d) No

MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3428. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: (a) Nil. (b)-(d) Not applicable. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3429. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services Could the Attorney General please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5241

(a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: No (a)-(d) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3430. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests Could the Minister please advise in relation to her ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: (a) No (b)-(d) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3431. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Water; Mental Health Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: (a)-(d) Nil. MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3432. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and

5242 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: The following answer refers to the date period of 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. Nil (a)-(d) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3433. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education Could the Minister please advise in relation to his ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: No (a)-(d) Not Applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY STAFF 3434. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth Could the Minister please advise in relation to her ministerial office staff, since 1 December 2009, has any ministerial officer accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many ministerial officers have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the State Government have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Nil (a)-(d) Not applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3436. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development Could the Premier please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual?

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5243

Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: For the period of 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010: Department of the Premier and Cabinet: (a) Please refer to part (b). (b)-(d) [See paper 2375.] Public Sector Commissioner: No officer above level 7.1 have accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual (a)-(d) Not applicable Department of State Development: (a) Please refer to part (b). (b)-(d) [See paper 2375.] Acting Commissioner of the Public Sector Standards; Gold Corporation: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable Lotterywest: (a)-(d) No Lotterywest staff member has accepted free travel or accommodation from a private company or individual since 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. Department of Treasury and Finance: (a) Two (b)-(d [See paper 2375.] Government Employees Superannuation Board: (a) Three (b)-(d) [See paper 2375.] Office of the Auditor General: (a) One (b)-(d) [See paper 2375.] Western Australian Treasury Corporation (a)-(d) No officer within Western Australian Treasury Corporation has accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual since 1 December 2009. Insurance Commission of WA (a)-(d) No officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual. PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3438. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual?

5244 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Mr W.R. MARMION replied: DEPARTMENT OF MINES & PETROLEUM MINERALS & ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES WESTERN AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable. PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3439. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: No. (a)-(d) Not applicable. PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3441. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: Public Transport Authority Nil. (a)-(d) Not applicable. Main Roads (a) Please refer to part (b). (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Travel to and accommodation in Brisbane provided by Roads $4 127.41 No Australia Travel to Canberra (from Melbourne) and accommodation $293.95 Yes provided by Engineers Australia Travel to and accommodation in Melbourne provided by $1 102.69 Yes National Transport Commission Travel to Melbourne provided by Lloyds Insurance $826.89 No

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5245

Disability Services Commission Nil. (a)-(d) Not applicable. Department of Transport Nil. (a)-(d) Not applicable.

PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3442. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: Western Australia Police (a) Please refer to part (b). (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Adelaide - GM Holden To inspect the Holden $650 (Approx) Yes Manufacturing and Operations Plant. Holden supply 'police pack' and light commercial vehicles to WA Police via the State Fleet Whole of Government Contract CIO Busselton 13 February 2010 Telstra Leeuwin Accommodation - $219 (Approx) Yes Concert - Guest CIO Sydney 1-4 March 2010 Gartner Summit - Flight - $1660 (Approx) Yes Guest Speaker Accommodation - $700 (Approx) Abacus Diagnostics USA. Abacus provided funding $3200 No covering travel and partial accommodation costs for attendance at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences Annual Meeting, February 2010, Seattle, USA Accommodation provided at the Royal Pines RACV $364 ($182 per night for two No Resort, Queensland by Marcus Evans in conjunction nights) with attendance at an industry sponsored CFO Australia and New Zealand Summit 2010 held 10 March to 12 March 2010 FESA Since 1 December 2009 no FESA officer above level 7.1 has accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual. (a)-(d) Not applicable Office of Road Safety The Office of Road Safety is administratively supported as part of Main Roads WA and as such the response will be included on the MRWA response under the Minister for Transport.

5246 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3443. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: DEPARTMENT OF SPORT AND RECREATION Nil (a)-(d) Not Applicable VENUESWEST Nil (a)-(d) Not Applicable DEPARTMENT OF RACING, GAMING AND LIQUOR Nil (a)-(d) Not Applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3444. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (a) Please refer to answer part (b) (b)-(d) [See paper 2384.] PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3445. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation;

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5247

(c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: Office of Energy (a) Nil. (b)-(d) Not applicable. Department of Training and Workforce Development (a) No officer above level 7.1 from the Department of Training and Workforce Development has accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual for the period 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. (b)-(d) Not applicable. Department of Education Services (a) 1 Officer. (b)-(d) [See paper 2390.] PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3446. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services Could the Attorney General please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: Commissioner for Children and Young People (a) No (b) Not applicable Corruption and Crime Commission of Western Australia (a) No (b) Not applicable Department of Corrective Services (a) No (b) Not applicable Department of the Attorney General (a) No (b) Not applicable Equal Opportunity Commission of Western Australia (a) No (b) Not applicable Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (a) No (b) Not applicable

5248 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

Legal Aid Commission of Western Australia (a) No (b) Not applicable Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (a) No (b) Not applicable OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER (a) No (b) Not applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3447. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests Could the Minister please advise for each agency within her portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: Department for Child Protection (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable The answer for the Department for Communities which includes Women's Interest; Senior's and Volunteers is; (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3448. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Water; Mental Health Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: For Aqwest: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable For Busselton Water Board: (a) Nil

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5249

(b)-(d) Not applicable For the Mental Health Commission: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable Please Note: For the period 1 December 2009 to 7 March 2010 the Mental Health Division (now known as the Mental Health Commission) formed part of the Department of Health which was in the Minister for Health's portfolio. For the period 1 December 2009 to 30 July 2010 the mental health services in the Area Health Services formed part of the Department of Health and of hospitals boards which are in the Minister for Health's portfolio. As a consequence, information concerning the Mental Health Division and mental health services (provided by Area Health Services) is included in the answer provided in respect of the Department of Health as a whole by the Minister for Health. For the Drug and Alcohol Office: (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable For the Department of Water: (a) Please refer to part (b). (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) 3 Officers travelled to Cloud Break mine site Approximately $1200 for travel. Yes and received accommodation on site from Accommodation was provided on site Fortescue Metals Group and is unable to be determined For the Water Corporation: (a)-(d) There are no known breaches in the Water Corporation's Code of Conduct, Standard S119 Ethics and Fair Dealing, and Standard S040 Travel and Conference Bookings. PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3449. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: The following answer refers date period of 1 December 2009 to 30 June 2010. Department of Local Government including the Office of Multicultural Interests; Heritage Council of Western Australia; Metropolitan Cemeteries Board; and National Trust of Australia (Western Australia) (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not Applicable PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3450. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and

5250 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: Department of Agriculture and Food (a) Please refer to part (b) (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Melbourne Intelact Australia Pty Ltd and Red Sky Melbourne $1700 No Agricultural Pty Ltd Sydney IIR Conferences Sydney $1630 No Oklahoma, USA Noble Foundation Oklahoma, USA $1000 No Forest Products Commission No (a)-(d) Not applicable.

PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3451. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth Could the Minister please advise for each agency within her portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: Department of Environment and Conservation; Swan River Trust; Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority; Department for Communities, including the Office for Youth (a) Nil (b)-(d) Not applicable Office of the Environmental Protection Authority (a) One (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Flight from Perth to Fortescue Metals Group Unknown - flight was a regular No. Ltd (FMG) Cloudbreak Mine and on-site company charter flight to the mine site. accommodation at the Mine Site. Office of the Appeals Convenor (a) One (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Flight from Perth to Windarling mine site Unknown - flight was a regular No. provided by Cliffs Natural Resources Pty Ltd company charter flight to the mine site.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5251

Perth Zoo (a) One (b)-(d) (b) (c) (d) Flight to Sydney and one night's accommodation $720.00 Unilever is a sponsor of Perth Zoo. provided by Unilever

PUBLIC SECTOR — FREE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATION ACCEPTANCE BY SENIOR STAFF 3452. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer Could the Minister please advise for each agency within his portfolio, since 1 December 2009, has any officer above level 7.1 within those agencies accepted any free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; and (a) if so, how many officers above level 7.1 have accepted free travel and/or accommodation from a private company or individual; (b) if so, where was the travel to, or where was the accommodation provided, and what is the name of the individual or private company that offered the travel and/or accommodation; (c) if so, what is the estimated value of the travel and/or accommodation; and (d) if so, does the agency have any commercial or financial relationship with the private company or individual? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: ChemCentre (a) None (b)-(d) Not Applicable WorkCover WA (a) None (b)-(d) Not Applicable WA Industrial Relations Commission (a) None (b)-(d) Not Applicable SBDC (a) None (b)-(d) Not Applicable The Department of Housing (a) None (b)-(d) Not Applicable The Department of Commerce (a) 1. (b)-(d)

Department Travel details (b) Value (c) Relationship (d) The Equal Opportunity Practitioners in Higher Education The estimated travel No. Australasia (EOPHEA) in conjunction with International and accommodation Conferences and Events (ICE) Australia provided travel cost is $239.50. from Sydney to Coffs Harbour in NSW, and one night's accommodation at Gemini Hotel, Randwick. This was associated with the officer being requested by these bodies to give a presentation at their conference.

5252 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS — RELOCATION 3453. Mr M. McGowan to the Treasurer I refer to the expiration of the lease of Governor Stirling Tower and ask, in relation to the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, the Public Sector Commission, the Department of Treasury and Finance, the Department of Indigenous Affairs, the Office of Energy, the Economic Regulation Authority, the Department of the Attorney General – Office of Native Title, the Office of Crime Prevention, the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, the Independent Market Operator and the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal: (a) what is the address of the location intended to relocate each agency to; (b) will all sections/divisions/operations/services of the agency be located at the same address; and (i) if not, where will the other section/division/operations/services be located; and (c) what is the anticipated cost of the move, including refurbishment and fit-out costs, for each agency? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: a) Planning for specific relocations is still under consideration. b) Current planning proposes that all section/divisions/operations/services of agencies currently accommodated in GST will be located at the same address. c) As planning is still under consideration it is not possible to provide costs for each agency. It should be noted that page 139 of Budget Paper 2, Volume 1 identifies funding allocated for the Master Planning Strategy - Government Office Accommodation. Page 128 of Budget Paper 2 also identifies savings of between $20 million and $25 million a year in lease costs over the next five years as a result of the decentralisation from the CBD and a new fit-out standard as part of the accommodation strategy. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3454. Mr M. McGowan to the Premier; Treasurer; Minister for State Development (1) Could the Premier advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Premier’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Premier’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5253

I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au.

PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3455. Mr M. McGowan to the Deputy Premier; Minister for Health; Indigenous Affairs (1) Could the Deputy Premier advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Deputy Premier’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au.

PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3456. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Mines and Petroleum; Fisheries; Electoral Affairs (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs?

5254 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au.

PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3457. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Regional Development; Lands; Minister Assisting the Minister for State Development; Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5255 conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3458. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Education; Tourism (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3459. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Transport; Disability Services (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held?

5256 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr M.J. COWPER replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au.

PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3460. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Police; Emergency Services; Road Safety (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5257 detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au.

PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3461. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Sport and Recreation; Racing and Gaming; Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr T.K. WALDRON replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au.

PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3462. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Planning; Culture and the Arts (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held?

5258 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3463. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Energy; Training and Workforce Development (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5259 detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3464. Mr M. McGowan to the Attorney General; Minister for Corrective Services (1) Could the Attorney General advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Attorney General’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Attorney General’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3465. Mr M. McGowan to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Child Protection; Community Services; Seniors and Volunteering; Women's Interests (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held?

5260 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr A.J. SIMPSON replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au.

PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3466. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Water; Mental Health (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5261 detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3467. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Local Government; Heritage; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3468. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held?

5262 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr D.T. REDMAN replied: (1)-(12) The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3469. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister representing the Minister for Environment; Youth (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5263 detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. PUBLIC SECTOR — OVERSEAS TRAVEL BY STAFF 3470. Mr M. McGowan to the Minister for Commerce; Science and Innovation; Housing; Minister Assisting the Treasurer (1) Could the Minister advise the total number of employees in each agency within the Minister’s portfolio of responsibilities who attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (2) What is the title, level and salary of each employee who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (3) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees? (4) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (5) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these employees held? (6) What was the cost to the State for each of these employees in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? (7) How many of the Minister’s ministerial staff have attended an overseas trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting paid for by the State since 23 September 2008? (8) What is the title, level and salary of each ministerial staff member who attended the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting? (9) What was the name of the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members? (10) Where was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff members held? (11) On what dates was the trade fair, conference, seminar or meeting attended by these ministerial staff held? (12) What was the cost to the State for each ministerial employee in terms of attendance fees, travel, accommodation and incidental costs? Mr W.R. MARMION replied: The Member would be aware that as part of the Liberal-National Government's commitment to transparency and accountability, quarterly travel reports are published by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. These reports detail the dates of interstate and overseas travel of all Government officers and the purpose of this travel i.e. conference, seminar or meetings. Also included in these reports are the cost of the travel, the destination and the names of the officers and Ministers who undertook this travel. I encourage the Member that if he has a specific question about a specific travel arrangement of a Minister or Government officer, he is welcome to submit another question on notice - in all other cases, I refer him to these travel reports which can be found at www.dpc.wa.gov.au. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF HERITAGE — DECISIONS 3472. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Heritage What decisions have been made by the Executive Director of the Office of Heritage since the Minister delegated all his powers under sections 7(1)(c) and 29(2)(c) of the Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990? Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: The Minister's powers under S7(1)(c) and S29(2)(c) of the Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990 were delegated to the Executive Director on 11 May 2010. These delegations enable the Executive Director to apply the resources of the Office of Heritage to the provision of assistance in the formation of Heritage Agreements as a service for Local Government without the need to seek the Minister's consent. There has been no occasion since the delegation was gazetted that the Executive Director has made a decision under this delegation.

5264 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

STOLEN WAGES REPORT — BUDGET CONTINGENCIES 3474. Mr R.H. Cook to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs I refer to the Minister’s comments in the media that the Department has budget contingencies for the outcomes of the Stolen Wages Report, and I ask: (a) what is quantum of that contingency; (b) under what line item in the May State Budget does this appear; (c) when will the report be made public; (d) what is the reason for the delay; and (e) given that the New South Wales and Queensland Governments have responded to this policy issue years ago, what hasn’t the Minister addressed this issue during his time in office? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) The Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA) is currently working through details of a compensation package for consideration by Cabinet. (b) Not applicable. (c) The Stolen Wages Taskforce Report will be released at the time the State Government announces details of a compensation package. (d) The Stolen Wages Taskforce Report was presented to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs in the previous State Government but was not acted on prior to the 2008 State election. The development of an Aboriginal Stolen Wages compensation scheme in Western Australia involves consideration of a number of complex matters, including lack of documentary evidence, an issue which did not apply in New South Wales where archival records were discovered. (e) As noted in (d) circumstances in Western Australia differ from those in other states.

ABORIGINAL ADVISORY COUNCIL — STRATEGIC PLAN 3475. Mr R.H. Cook to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs I refer to the Western Australian Aboriginal Advisory Council (WAAAC), and ask: (a) this committee is supposed to meet six times a year – how many times has it met to date in 2010; (b) why hasn’t the WAAAC strategic plan been made available on its website or tabled in Parliament; (c) will the Minister make the plan available to the public and can the Minister provide me with a copy of the WAAAC strategic plan; and (d) what progress has been made with respect to the implementation of this plan? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: a) Three. b) The Western Australian Aboriginal Advisory Council Strategic Plan is currently in draft form and has not been released publicly. c) The Strategic Plan will be released publicly once it has been endorsed. d) Not applicable.

DERBARL YERRIGAN COMMITTEE — FUTURE OPERATION 3476. Mr R.H. Cook to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs I refer to the reburial of Yagan’s Kaat, which I understand is scheduled for 10 July 2010, and ask: (a) will the Derbarl Yerrigan Committee continue to operate following the opening of the park and the reburial ceremony, or will it cease to operate after the reburial; and (b) what is the annual budget for this committee (broken down by sitting fees, allowances, administration support and operational budget)? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) The Derbarl Yerrigan Committee for the Reburial of Yagan's Kaat is a community initiated group mandated by the Noongar community to locate and bury Yagan's skull. The committee ceased

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5265

operations following the reburial ceremony on 10 July 2010. An Indigenous Reference Group will be formed shortly to advise the City of Swan on its management of the Yagan Memorial Park at Belhus. (b) There is no annual budget and members have not been paid sitting fees or allowances. Administrative support was provided by the Department of Indigenous Affairs. Operational costs associated with the reburial were drawn from funds provided by Lotterywest and the Outer Metropolitan Community Fund. ALBANY COURT HOUSE — STAFFING LEVELS 3477. Mr P.B. Watson to the Attorney General I refer to staffing levels at the Albany Court House, and I ask: (a) as at 31 May 2010, could the Premier indicate for each staff member working in the Albany Courthouse, including staff on secondment, placement or attachment to the office: (i) their level; (ii) salary band for employee; (iii) type of employment contract; and (iv) length of employment contract; (b) of these positions: (i) how many are full-time; (ii) how many are part-time; and (iii) how many are casual; (c) in relation to vacant positions: (i) how many vacancies currently exist; (ii) what positions are they; and (iii) how long have the vacancies been unfilled for; (d) at 30 June 2009 what is the total number of full-time equivalent staff employed; and (e) are there any plans to change how staffing levels are managed; and (i) if so, how will this affect staff numbers? Mr C.C. PORTER replied: (a) (i)-(iv) Level Salary Band Employment Type Employment Length Level 6 $81,501 - $90,249 Permanent Full time N/A Level 4 $62,959 - $66,538 Permanent Full time N/A Level 3 $55,913 - $60,707 Permanent Full time N/A Level 3 $55,913 - $60,707 Permanent Full time N/A Level 3 $55,913 - $60,707 Permanent Full time N/A Level 2 $48,730 - $52,916 Permanent Full time N/A Level 2 $48,730 - $52,916 Fixed term Full time 15February-30 June 2010 Level 2 $48,730 - $52,916 Fixed term Full time 2 March-30 June 2010 Level 2 $48,730 - $52,916 Casual Part time 0.2 FTE Cleaner $37,655 - $38,434 Casual Part time 0.1 FTE (b) (i) Eight (8) of the positions are full time. (ii) Two staff 'job-shared' one position and were employed on a fixed term part time basis. (iii) The cleaner position is a casual part time however given the difficulty in filling the position it has been contracted to a cleaning firm. One level 2 (0.2 FTE) position is used to employ a casual officer as and when required. (c) (i) One (1) vacant position does not have a substantive occupant. (ii) Regional Manager - Level 6 (iii) The position has been substantively vacant since 27 April 2010 however, an officer has been acting in the position since that date. (d) 8.2 (e) The option of amalgamating the South West and Great Southern Regions with the Regional Manager Bunbury as the amalgamated Regional Manager is being examined. (i) There will be no change in staff numbers.

5266 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND FOOD — AIRCRAFT CHARTER 3478. Mr P.B. Watson to the Premier During this year (to 31 May 2010): (a) how many trips has the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education made under the Government’s contract for air charter services; (b) what were the destinations and the purpose of each trip; and (c) how long was the aircraft sitting on the tarmac at each of these destinations? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises that according to Air Charter records: (a) 10 (b)-(c) Date / Destination / Time or tarmac at destination 5 January 2010, Perth - Jurien Bay and return, 5 hours 7 minutes at Jurien Bay. 27 January 2010, Perth - Albany and return, 3 hours 44 minutes at Albany. *4 March 2010, Dongara - Narrogin - Perth, 5 hours 5 minutes at Narrogin. 21 March 2010, Albany - Perth, 26 minutes at Albany. 22 March 2010, Perth - Esperance, 14 hours 7 minutes at Esperance. 23 March 2010, Esperance - Kalgoorlie - Perth, 2 hours 33 minutes at Kalgoorlie. 25 March 2010, Perth - Albany, 12 minutes at Albany. 22 April 2010, Perth - Darwin, 31 hours 50 minutes at Darwin. 24 April 2010, Darwin - Albany, 13 minutes at Albany. 20 May 2010, Perth - Albany, 10 minutes at Albany. All trips (above) were noted as official ministerial business. Please note re 4 March 2010 entry: The plane flew from Karratha to Dongara empty, so Dongara is the beginning of the leg for Minister Redman (the plane had been used for another Minister, which is why it was in the area).

DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT — LEGAL ACTION THREATS TO COUNCILLORS 3481. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Local Government In relation to the Department of Local Government or its predecessor, the Department of Local Government and Regional Development, I ask: (a) how many times since 1 January 2005 has the Department written formally to a sitting or former local government council member implying a breach of the Local Government Act 1995 (LGA) and advising that legal action may be taken; and (i) please provide a breakdown of the responses, year by year; (b) how many times since 1 January 2005 has the Department written formally to a sitting or former local government council member implying a breach of the LGA and advising that the matter may be taken to the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT); and (i) please provide a breakdown of the responses, year by year; and (c) what were the outcomes from the communications identified at (a) and (b), and on how many occasions did they occur; and (i) please include the breakdown for each of the following outcomes year by year: (A) taken to court with a final outcome by the court of guilty; (B) taken to court with a final outcome by the court of not guilty; (C) listed for court or taken to court and a court outcome is pending; (D) taken to SAT with a final outcome by the SAT of an adverse finding against the council member; (E) taken to SAT with a final outcome by the SAT of no adverse finding against the council member; (F) listed for SAT or taken to SAT and a SAT outcome is pending;

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5267

(G) closed, with a caution response to the sitting or former council member concerned as a result of that person admitting guilt, or some other form of inappropriate action or conduct; (H) closed, with a caution response to the sitting or former council member concerned, citing that it was not in the public interest to pursue prosecution; (I) closed, with a caution response to the sitting or former council member concerned, for reasons other than pursuit of the matter not being in the public interest, admission of guilt or other inappropriate action; (J) closed, with no action or caution required (i.e the Department concluded no breach had occurred); (K) open and pending Departmental assessment; and (L) any other outcome not identified above. Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: Please note that the Liberal National Government came into office on 23 September 2008 and, as such, cannot provide answers for the previous Government administration. The Department deals with two distinct types of complaints: General Complaints and Serious Breach Complaints. Both categories are defined by the requirement to follow different legislative process in each case. General Complaints General Complaints are defined as those that do not fall under the Provisions of the Local Government (Official Conduct) Amendment Act 2007; these types of complaints are diverse and can encompass allegations concerning dissatisfaction with the operations of a local government that are not a breach of any legislation and also include serious matters such as offences committed by individuals that can result in prosecutions. Serious Breach Complaints Serious Breach Complaints are referred to the Departmental Chief Executive Officer (CEO) under Section 5.116(2) of the Local Government Act 1995 (LGA 1995). If the Departmental CEO considers it appropriate to do so, the Departmental CEO may, whether or not a complaint has been sent to the Departmental CEO, make an allegation to the State Administrative Tribunal that the council member committed a serious breach. Section 5.116(3) of the LGA 1995states that in deciding whether it would be appropriate to make an allegation to the State Administrative Tribunal, the Departmental CEO has to consider whether it would be more appropriate for the matter to be dealt with in another way. (a) Serious Breach Complaints: 98 Of the 343 General Complaints received, 34 warnings were issued relating to Breaches of the LGA 1995. (i) 23 September 2008 - 30 June 2009 Serious Breach Complaints: 53 General Complaints: 19 1 July 2009 - 30 June 2010 Serious Breach Complaints: 45 General Complaints: 15 (b) From 23 September 2008 Serious Breaches Complaints: 98 (i) Please see answer to Question (a)(i) (c) Serious Breach Complaints: 23 September 2008 - 30 June 2009 • Complaint Dismissed: 25 • Departmental Warning Issued: 4 • Referred to Other Agency: 2 • No Jurisdiction to Act by Dept or Minister: 1 • Complaint Unfounded: 1 • Non-Complying Complaint: 20

5268 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

1 July 2009 - 30 June 2010 • Complaint Dismissed: 4 • Departmental Warning Issued: 4 • Non-Complying Complaint: 37 General Complaints: 23 September 2008 - 30 June 2009 • Complaint Dismissed: 3 • Department Warning Issued: 19 • Referred to Other Agency: 13 • No Jurisdiction to Act by Dept or Minister: 17 • Complaint Unfounded: 27 • Advice Provided No Further Action by Dept: 70 • Unsubstantiated: 15 • Recorded for Ongoing Monitoring Purposes: 18 • Process Improvement Recommended: 5 • Referred to Local Government for Other Action: 1 • Department Prosecution: 2 1 July 2009 - 30 June 2010 • Complaint Dismissed: 7 • Departmental Warning Issued: 15 • Referred to other Agency: 4 • No Jurisdiction to Act by Dept or Minister: 21 • Complaint Unfounded: 14 • Advice Provided No Further Action by Dept: 58 • Unsubstantiated: 12 • Recorded for Ongoing Monitoring Purposes: 14 • Process Improvement Recommended: 3 • Referred to Local Government for Other Action: 5 (A) 23 September 2008 to 30 June 2009 2 Prosecutions and 2 Guilty outcomes 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 Nil Prosecutions and Nil Guilty outcomes (B)-(F) Nil (G) Serious Breach Complaints: 23 September 2008 — 30 June 2009 o Departmental Warning Given: 4 1 July 2009 — 30 June 2010 o Departmental Warning Given: 4 General Complaints: 23 September 2008 — 30 June 2009 o Department Warning Issued: 19 1 July 2009 — 30 June 2010 o Departmental Warning Issued: 15 (H)-(I) In all cases, when deciding on prosecution, the Department takes into account whether a prima facie case exists and whether a prosecution is in the public interest. (J) Serious Breach Complaints: 23 September 2008 — 30 June 2009 • Complaint Dismissed: 25 • Complaint Unfounded: 1 1 July 2009 — 30 June 2010 • Complaint Dismissed: 4

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5269

General Complaints: 23 September 2008 — 30 June 2009 • Complaint Dismissed: 3 • Complaint Unfounded: 27 • Unsubstantiated: 15 1 July 2009 — 30 June 2010 • Complaint Dismissed: 7 • Complaint Unfounded: 14 • Unsubstantiated: 1 (K) As of 5 July 2010, the Department has 139 open and pending assessments, of these, 91 are General, 48 are Serious Breach complaints. Serious Breach Complaints: 23 September 2008 — 30 June 2009 7 1 July 2009 — 30 June 2010 41 General Complaints: 23 September 2008 — 30 June 2009 29 1 July 2009 — 30 June 2010 62 (L) Not Applicable DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT — LEGAL THREATS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS 3482. Mr J.N. Hyde to the Minister for Local Government In relation to section 5.41 of the Local Government Act 1995 (LGA), which specifies the functions of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), including providing advice and information to the local council, I ask: (a) how many times since 1 January 2005 has the Department written formally to a current or former local government CEO implying a breach of section 5.41, or any other section, of the LGA and advising that legal action may be taken; and (i) please provide a breakdown of the response, year by year; (b) how many times since 1 January 2005 has the Department written formally to a current or former local government CEO implying a breach of section 5.41, or any other section, of the LGA and advising that the matter may be taken to the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT); and (i) please provide a breakdown of the response, year by year; (c) what were the outcomes from the communications identified at (a) and (b) and on how many occasions did they occur; and (i) please include the breakdown for each of the following outcomes, year by year: (A) taken to court with a final outcome by the court of guilty; (B) taken to court with a final outcome by the court of not guilty; (C) listed for court or taken to court and a court outcome is pending; (D) taken to SAT with a final outcome by the SAT of an adverse finding against the council member; (E) taken to SAT with a final outcome by the SAT of no adverse finding against the council member; (F) listed for SAT or taken to SAT and a SAT outcome is pending; (G) closed, with a caution response to the sitting or former council member concerned as a result of that person admitting guilt, or some other form of inappropriate action or conduct;

5270 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010]

(H) closed, with a caution response to the sitting or former council member concerned, citing that it was not in the public interest to pursue prosecution; (I) closed, with a caution response to the sitting or former council member concerned, for reasons other than pursuit of the matter not being in the public interest, admission of guilt or other inappropriate action; (J) closed, with no action or caution required (i.e the Department concluded no breach had occurred); (K) open and pending Departmental assessment; and (L) any other outcome not identified above. Mr G.M. CASTRILLI replied: The Liberal National Government came to office on 23 September 2008 and as such, cannot provide answers for previous Government administrations. Section 5.41 of the Local Government Act 1995 describes the general functions of a Chief Executive Officer of a local government and, as such, there are no offence provisions. (a) Nil in relation to Section 5.41 One in relation to Section 5.76 (i) 23 September 2008 — 30 June 2009 Nil 1 July 2009 — 30 June 2010 One in relation to Section 5.76 (b) Nil - Only Serious Breach Complaints can be referred to the State Administrative Tribunal and Serious Breach Complaints can only be made against elected members and cannot be made against a Chief Executive Officer. (i) Not applicable (c) (i) One Departmental Warning in relation to Section 5.76 (A)-(G) Not applicable (H) 23 September 2008 — 30 June 2009 Nil 1 July 2009 — 30 June 2010 One Departmental Warning given (I)-(L) Not applicable

BUDGET PAPER NO 2 — SUPPLEMENTARY FUNDING 3483. Mr R.H. Cook to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs Minister, I refer to the line item entitled ‘Defer 2008–2009 Supplementary Funding to Outyears’ on page 210, Volume 1 of the 2010–2011 State Budget Paper No. 2, and I ask: (a) what is the breakdown of this funding; and (b) what is the reason for the deferral? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) 2009-10 - $665,000 relates to Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA) capacity building and agency reform within DIA. 2012-13 - $1,200,000 is funding for the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery (RSD NP) project. (b) $665,000 was deferred pending organisational structural review outcomes due for completion in 2009- 10. $1,200,000 for the RSD NP Project was deferred due to delays associated with reaching agreement with the Commonwealth Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) on implementation of the Regional Operations Centre in Broome. The funds were repositioned to 2012-13 when the original funding was due to lapse.

[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 10 August 2010] 5271

INDIGENOUS IMPLEMENTATION BOARD — SECRETARIAL SUPPORT 3484. Mr R.H. Cook to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs (1) I refer to comments that the Department has consolidated its secretarial support for the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB), and ask, what has been the reduction in secretarial support for the Board in terms of both full-time equivalents and budget? (2) It has taken eight months for the State Government to respond to the IIB’s first six-month report in August 2009. When does the Minister expect to provide a response to its second six-monthly report which was tabled in April 2010? (3) The first IIB six-month report was two months late, the second report was four months late – will the next one be on time? (4) Have any of the IIB members resigned from the committee since its inception; and (i) if so, whom and what reason (if any) did they give for their resignation? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (1) There has been no reduction in secretariat support for the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB). (2) July 2010. (3) The first report of the IIB was not late. The IIB commenced operation in February 2009 and made its first report in August 2009. The second report was due in February 2010 and the IIB sought an extension of one month, which was granted. The IIB reported in March 2010. The IIB's next report will be made at the agreed time. (4) No. (i) Not applicable. PARTNERSHIP ACCEPTANCE LEARNING SHARING PROGRAMS — GRANTS 3485. Mr R.H. Cook to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs I refer to the Partnership Acceptance Learning Sharing Programs (PALS) and the 2010–2011 State Budget, and I ask: (a) why aren’t PALS grants listed as a separate item in the details of controlled grants and subsidies; (b) is it true that PALS grants are normally up to a maximum of $750 per grant; (c) how many schools received a PALS grant in the 2009–2010 financial year, and how does this compare with the amount of schools receiving this grant in 2008–2009 and 2008–2007; (d) what was the budget allocation for PALS in 2009–2010; (e) what will be the budget allocation for PALS in 2010–2011; and (f) will there be any change to the maximum amount schools can apply for in PALS in the 2010–2011 year or the out-year estimates for the next four years? Dr K.D. HAMES replied: (a) The size of the PALS grants has not warranted specific individual disclosure. PALS grants are currently included in the Various Indigenous Community Grants line item. (b) Yes. (c) 2007-2008 - 79 2008-2009 - 154 2009-2010 - 129 (d) The total budget allocation for PALS in 2009-2010 was $230,000. This includes an allocation of $100,000 for grants from the Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA) and $130,000 for the operation and marketing of PALS through BHP Billiton (BHP). (e) The total budget allocation for PALS in 2010-2011 is $460,000. This includes an allocation of $230,000 for grants from DIA and $230,000 for the operation and marketing of PALS through BHP. (f) There are currently no plans to increase the maximum amount that schools can apply for. ______