Legislative Assembly
Tuesday, 13 June 2006
THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling) took the chair at 2.00 pm, and read prayers.
PROCEDURE AND PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE - SECOND REPORT Statement by Leader of the House MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta - Leader of the House) [2.02 pm]: On 13 April this year, the Procedure and Privileges Committee presented report 2 of 2006, suggesting a number of minor adjustments to the standing orders. As part of the ongoing review of standing orders, several changes have been suggested to PPC members or noted by the Clerks as being necessary to tidy up small drafting inconsistencies, some of which occurred during the major rewrite and modernisation of the standing orders several years ago. These include - making the videoconferencing procedures used by committees a permanent part of standing orders; making a minor clarification of the procedures used during an opening of Parliament to reflect current practice; including the accepted one-hour time limit for presentation of an estimates committee’s report being listed under standing order 101; requiring a member to stand when calling for a point of order during a division; clarifying the procedure used by the Speaker for determining an absolute majority in the house; a simple amendment in relation to granting leave for giving a personal explanation when no other “business” is before the house; clarifying the current practice of the house of counting the day on which the second reading debate is adjourned as the first day; that is, if debate is adjourned on a Thursday, the second reading debate can be resumed on Thursday in three weeks; including a requirement that a quorum of a legislation committee be three members; including a requirement that debate time for the presentation of a legislation committee report to the Legislative Assembly be one hour in total, as is the current practice; and inserting a new heading “PROROGATION” before standing order 220 to clearly identify that part of the bills procedures that relate to the prorogation of Parliament. The government has considered and supports all 10 recommendations made in the report, and I will give notice of a motion to implement the proposed changes in the next few days. Once again, Mr Speaker, I thank you and the members and staff of the Procedure and Privileges Committee for your continuing suggestions to reform and modernise the standing orders of this house.
TOURISM WA - REPORT OF STUDY ON STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTIONS Statement by Minister for Tourism MS S.M. McHALE (Kenwick - Minister for Tourism) [2.04 pm]: Last year Tourism Western Australia engaged consultants to undertake a study into stakeholder perceptions of the organisation and the services it provides. This was done proactively as part of Tourism WA’s commitment to continuous improvement and as a measurement against the organisation’s internal key performance indicators. I received a copy of the report prepared as an internal document to assist Tourism WA in March 2006. The objective of this report was to understand the level of satisfaction with Tourism WA and the organisation’s importance to the tourism industry. Research was undertaken with key stakeholder groups including the tourism industry, tourism associations and government. Tourism WA was acknowledged as valuable and important to the state’s tourism industry and the majority surveyed were either satisfied or very satisfied with Tourism WA and its leadership. Importantly, the research found that Tourism WA was performing well in a number of its core roles: marketing and promotion in key markets; providing information to visitors; and setting an overall strategic vision for the future of tourism in WA. I am pleased to report that this research also indicated that the more people dealt with the organisation and its staff, the more satisfied they were with the organisation’s performance.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3499
This report found that perceptions of Tourism WA were moving from bureaucratic and reactive to proactive and entrepreneurial. The research identified several areas where improvement can be made, such as timeliness in decision making and consultation with industry. I know that the areas identified as ones in which further effort could be undertaken, such as communication and consultation, have been taken on board by the organisation. For example, the Tourism WA board and executive staff have established a communication strategy with initiatives to strengthen regular communications to industry via targeted newsletters, face-to-face communications and industry forums. The agency is also committed to building its links with peak industry bodies and other government organisations. The report was the subject of an answer to a question on notice from the member for Capel, and the report was to have been tabled on 11 April 2006 but was inadvertently not attached to the answer. This KPI research has been a valuable undertaking and Tourism WA will redo the research in 2007. I table the report. [See paper 1580.]
PREMIER’S BOOK AWARDS Statement by Minister for Culture and the Arts MS S.M. McHALE (Kenwick - Minister for Culture and the Arts) [2.05 pm]: Western Australia has a wealth of literary talent in all its forms. Names including Tom Hungerford, Sally Morgan, Tim Winton and Kim Scott, to name a few, have filled shelves internationally. With an ever-growing Western Australian literary culture, I had the honour on Friday, 9 June of celebrating the literary achievements of Western Australia’s writers with the presentation of the 2005 Premier’s Book Awards. With 134 entries from established and new writers, I can inform Parliament that writing is certainly flourishing in Western Australia. Authors Sue Davenport, Peter Johnson and Yuwali were awarded the 2005 Premier’s Prize, as well as the Western Australian History Award, for their work Cleared Out, which tells of the first contact between a group of Martu women and children and white Australians in 1964. This is an extraordinary story that portrays events from different viewpoints and shows how misunderstandings have arisen from the time Aboriginal people and white Australians made contact. The winner of the Fiction Award was Everyman’s Rules for Scientific Living by Carrie Tiffany. It was also the feature book for the 2006 Perth International Arts Festival’s One Book program. Rod Moran won the Poetry Award for The Paradoxes of Water: Selected and New Poems, 1970-2005. The non-fiction category fielded two winners with Richard Bosworth for Mussolini’s Italy: Life Under the Dictatorship and Philippa Nikulinsky and Stephen Hopper for Soul of the Desert. Wendy Binks’ Where’s Stripey won the children’s category and the winning work for young adults was awarded to Kirsty Murray for A Prayer for Bluey Delaney. The final category for best script was awarded to Reg Cribb for Last Train to Freo, the film of which has been produced with state government support through ScreenWest and will be in cinemas later this year. A key event for our literary industry, the Premier’s Book Awards celebrate and promote the works and words of our writers. The Premier’s award program links with the building blocks of books and resources people access every day through the extensive statewide library network. It reinforces the capacity of the Better Beginnings family literacy program, a state government initiative, which promotes the importance of books and reading in a child’s life. Through history books we understand more about ourselves by learning more about our history. My congratulations to all who judged and wrote books and were finalists and winners.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
OUTCOMES-BASED EDUCATION - PREMIER’S INVOLVEMENT 320. Mr P.D. OMODEI to the Premier: I refer to the numerous assertions of both the Minister for Education and Training and the Premier that they would not be changing their implementation plan for outcomes-based education. (1) Does the Premier concede that because of his obstinate support for the Minister for Education and the Premier’s OBE plan in the past, his recent concession on the need for change has damaged his own credibility and leadership? (2) Why has it taken the Premier until now to realise there is a problem with his OBE plan, and will he concede that the belated changes he is now negotiating have the potential to confuse teachers even further? (3) Will the Premier take this opportunity to pledge to Western Australia’s teachers that he will leave the door open for the implementation of OBE to be delayed if they are still not ready following these changes; and, if not, why not?
3500 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. Before I respond, I welcome the students of West Morley Primary School to the Parliament. Also, I am sure I am speaking for everybody in the Parliament in congratulating the Socceroos. Members: Hear, hear! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: What a great night it was! It was one of the greatest moments in Australia’s sporting history, I think. What a genius “Golden” Guus Hiddink is! Next stop, Fremantle Dockers. I think he is definitely the next coach. If we can appoint Ric Charlesworth, we can appoint Guus Hiddink, no problem about that. I will round that off by saying I stayed awake until the 70-minute mark, so I am one of the world’s great losers. I could not believe it when I woke up this morning and realised what I had missed. Anyway, it was brilliant, a great achievement; let us hope they can keep going. (1)-(3) In relation to the issue raised by the Leader of the Opposition, as far as I recall I have always said that whenever genuine concerns were raised by teachers we would endeavour to address them, and we have. That is the fact of the matter. Whenever genuine concerns were raised by the teachers we sought to address them, and I think we are doing that successfully. We had a very good meeting a couple of weeks ago with the subject association heads and drew out from each of the subject associations, representing the teachers of all those subjects, what the concerns were that could be addressed. The Minister for Education and I were obviously working together there. A series of meetings went on. The Minister for Education, the Curriculum Council, the Department of Education and Training and all the stakeholders worked together to try to address the issues, which really were around certainty of content and context, comparability between schools and students, and the assessment process and the workload associated with that. My belief is that after the very constructive meeting we held in my office on Sunday morning, chaired by the education minister, we have very good support for the modifications that have been made to the introduction of outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12. I am hopeful, although obviously nothing is guaranteed, that the State School Teachers’ Union council will accept those changes at its meeting on the weekend and this matter can then proceed with all concerned being satisfied that the implementation is manageable. That is my position. In relation to the other issues raised by the Leader of the Opposition, it has been a difficult process. It may have damaged my credibility. Lots of things that I do and say may damage my credibility. I am not the person who is able to judge that. The Leader of the Opposition can make those judgments, and, ultimately I suppose, my colleagues and the wider community make the judgment. My view of it - and I am very objective, as members would appreciate - is that it will be seen that the government had a significant reform agenda, which has been going on for some time now, and we were keen to make sure that agenda went ahead. Momentum was building. We recognise that genuine concerns were raised about the process and the reform itself and, as we said we would, we have sought to address those concerns. Perhaps members of the Liberal Party believe that governments lose credibility for going ahead with the planned programs they present to the community and for making adjustments along the way to accommodate the community’s concerns, but I do not. If governments do lose credibility for that, I will feel the brunt of it in time. We now are in a good position. I had a lot of constructive support from members of the Parliament on both sides. I cannot name everybody in the Parliament who gave their support, but those members know who they are; I am very grateful to them. However, I can name the members on the government’s side. I had great support from the members for Wanneroo, Bassendean and the member for Central Kimberley-Pilbara. Members can see that I am excited by the whole thing; I have lost all context. I thank those three members of Parliament for the individual input they have provided, and I thank also those members on the other side of the house who may or may not wish to be recognised. This reform is being implemented in the best interests of young Western Australians. The prime focus must be the interests of the students, so that they will be in a position to take advantage of the wonderful potential the Western Australian economy can offer them. I am grateful that we now have the support of the broader education community. I have a meeting to attend on the weekend, but I hope to get a good resolution from it. OUTCOMES-BASED EDUCATION - DELAY IN IMPLEMENTATION 321. Mr P.D. OMODEI to the Premier: The Premier did not answer my last question, and so I ask it again as a supplementary question. Will the Premier take this opportunity to pledge to Western Australian teachers that he will leave the door open for the
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3501 implementation of the outcomes-based education system to be delayed if the teachers remain unprepared for these changes; and, if not, why not? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I have absolutely no reason to believe that it will be delayed. The State School Teachers’ Union of WA did not talk to me in terms of delay; it talked to me about the readiness of the teachers to implement the change. I do not believe there will be a requirement to delay the process. I have no expectation that the broader group of teachers will demand that the process be delayed. That would serve no purpose. We must tell people what we want to do. I went through this process when debating raising the school leaving age. We must tell people what we want to do and how we want to implement it. We must decide how we can work together to achieve that outcome. That is what we have done, and I am confident that the right result will be achieved.
NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY 322. Mr M.P. WHITELY to the Premier: How does Western Australia feature in the federal government’s national energy policy? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for Bassendean for the question and for his constructive support on a range of issues, including this one. How does Western Australia figure in the federal government’s national energy policy? It is clear that it does not. It does not appear as though the federal government has a national energy policy, which is unfortunate for Australia. We all know that a debate is currently being conducted about nuclear energy. However, the debate should be about Australia’s energy requirements for the future. Western Australia can play a very significant role in providing energy security for the future. Members know that Western Australia has abundant gas supplies offshore, in particular, and also onshore. For a long time - going back to the 1970s and 1980s - governments of both persuasions have worked to develop the state’s energy resources in the interest of the state and the nation. We can now take it to another level in the national interest, over and above simply reaping royalty rewards for exports. We must do that, and we will do that. I have often said - my view is supported in various other places - that we must construct a mechanism by which the rest of Australia can benefit more directly from our wonderful gas reserves. We have good coal reserves and a renascent coal industry in Collie, thanks to the great advocacy of the member for Collie-Wellington, the ministerial support he received last year and the then Premier. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Let us face it: we have the opportunity to develop a great future for Collie. If we must spend money doing it, we should. We spend money also in Bunbury, Karratha, the Pilbara and the Kimberley - Mr M.J. Cowper: Don’t forget Geraldton. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The member might not have noticed that we have spent a little bit of money in Geraldton! Also, there no longer seems to be any interest at the commonwealth level in renewable energies. Instead, we have the promotion of nuclear power. I have taken up the issue of domestic gas reserves and the opportunities for increased domestic gas reserves with the commonwealth government and Minister Macfarlane. It is very disappointing that Minister Macfarlane takes a completely unconstructive attitude towards the possibility of reserving more of our gas resources for domestic production. That would generate all sorts of dynamics. We would have the potential to pipe the gas eastwards to the big energy markets on the east coast. That is a much better option in the national interest than is piping it down from Papua New Guinea. The option that we have put forward in Western Australia is far superior to that. We would not have the issue of sovereign risk, for a start - unless, of course, we took the ultimate step in Western Australia and decided to go our own way, which we are unlikely to do - that we would have if we brought gas down from Papua New Guinea. To me, and I know also to many people on both sides of the Parliament, the nuclear option does not make economic sense for Australia. It does not make social sense. It also does not make environmental sense. I do not often praise the member for Leschenault, but I am heartened by the comments he has made in his local media about nuclear energy being completely - Mr M.P. Murray: He also made some comments on the coal industry about a week ago. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I know. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Seeing that we are having this mutual admiration session, can you tell us when we will be getting natural gas at Kemerton? Just answer that one simple question. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The member should not worry about that. It will get there. I am heartened by the fact that the member for Leschenault is an outspoken critic of the nuclear option for Western Australia. Be wary. What we have said before about this whole uranium debate is correct. Western Australia is being positioned to
3502 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] be not only a uranium miner and exporter but also the recipient of nuclear waste from all around the world. A lot of evidence has been developed that points to Western Australia as being the ideal place for a nuclear waste dump site: we are geographically remote, geologically stable, politically stable and demographically sparse. We are identified as being the ideal place. We do not need to do that. We do not need to go down that path, and we should not. However, we are being, I think, let down by the federal government, which does not have a national energy strategy. We should have one. The nation should do it. I speak to business and political people from the east of Australia who are only vaguely aware of the potential that sits on our north west coast. A lot of them do not even know that there is a gas pipeline from the north west to the south west of Australia. They have no idea. They certainly do not know that there is a pipeline to Kalgoorlie, and another one down to Esperance. We need to raise this issue and give it greater profile in the national political debate, and we will.
OUTCOMES-BASED EDUCATION - HANDLING BY MINISTER FOR EDUCATION AND TRAINING 323. Mr J.H.D. DAY to the Premier: I refer to the Premier’s decision to take over the reins on the introduction of outcomes-based education in years 11 and 12. (1) Was the Premier’s decision to take over the implementation of OBE a vote of no confidence in the Minister for Education and Training? (2) How can the Premier justify the education minister’s position in cabinet, and her $200 000 a year-plus salary, given her incompetence in handling the OBE issue? (3) How can the education minister play a backseat role in the implementation of one of the most significant changes ever in the education portfolio? (4) Are Western Australian taxpayers getting value for money from their education minister, or are they simply funding another passenger in the Premier’s cabinet? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for the question. (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) The Minister for Education and Training chaired the crucial meeting on the weekend, and I have great confidence in her. Mr T.R. Sprigg: Front up! Do not duck for cover! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Front up? (4) Yes. It is interesting. What role do people think the Premier should play? I remember that the previous Premier was criticised consistently because it was asserted that he would only ever come out when the news was good. That was the criticism of the previous Premier. Now the criticism of the current Premier is that we only ever see him when there are problems!
MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 324. Mrs D.J. GUISE to the Treasurer: Will the Treasurer outline what measures the government is taking to provide for the needs of Western Australians affected by mental illness? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: The government is committed to improving mental health services through in-patient services, intermediate care and community support options. That is why we have allocated $173 million to build new mental health facilities throughout the state, providing108 acute in-patient beds, employing 400 new mental health workers and constructing an extra 400 community supported accommodation beds and 47 intermediate care beds for mental health patients across the state. That is why we signed up for Beyondblue in November 2004. The government’s total spending on mental health is up by 50 per cent on 2001 levels. Ours will be the first state to lift mental health spending to nine per cent of the total health budget. That is our record on mental health: better resources for mental health services and better resources for care in the community. What about the other side of politics? The opposition has a new mantra launched by the member for Vasse. What is the new doctrine of members opposite? It is “less with less”. Those are the new opposition buzzwords - the Buswell buzzwords. They are not original, because they are taken from the shadow Treasurer’s new guru, a former Republican
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3503 governor of Massachusetts, William Weld. Less with less was his slogan, and he certainly put the doctrine into practice. Less with less means cuts to mental health services. William Weld took the advice of his favourite think tank, the Pioneer Institute, and shut down mental health facilities and left patients to the mercy of the private sector. That is what he did with his less with less campaign. That is the sort of policy that Western Australians can expect from the new “less with less” opposition. I think that Western Australians will have a very good understanding of what a “less with less” approach would mean - cuts to services, user pays and less investment in infrastructure. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 325. Dr S.C. THOMAS to the Minister for the Environment: Given that the draft State of the Environment: Western Australia Report released on 1 June lists greenhouse gas emissions as one of the 80 primary environmental concerns for Western Australia, and that the minister during budget estimates revealed that he believed the Kyoto Protocol to be flawed - (1) What has the minister done to address the issue of emissions in this state? (2) Why can the federal government claim the country as a whole will reach its own target of 108 per cent of 1990 levels when, by the minister’s own admission, Western Australia will fail to do so? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (1)-(2) It is a little unusual to have a member of the Liberal Party expressing some concern about greenhouse gas emissions. I am a little bit surprised to hear it. The truth of the matter is that only one side of politics is taking this issue seriously, and that is this side. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr M. McGOWAN: That was a very relevant interjection by the member for Nedlands! Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, member for Nedlands! Mr M. McGOWAN: A couple of weeks ago I launched a package of measures that the government is proposing to bring in, one of which includes the greenhouse gas inventory. The government will require industry to report the sorts of greenhouse gases that it is emitting, so we will have a mechanism for measuring what is being done. Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that when Wagerup comes in? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr P.D. Omodei: Next week? The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN: This is a very significant measure because it will mean that for the first time we will be able to tell what greenhouse gases individual industries are emitting. At the moment the commonwealth is very negative about this approach. It prefers a voluntary approach by industry to determine what sorts of greenhouse gas emissions are taking place. Of course, a voluntary approach means that the data on these issues will never be fully factual. The commonwealth says that the targets for greenhouse gas emissions have been met by the states and territories. Why does the commonwealth say that? It is because the states and territories have cracked down on land clearing, which means that the projections for greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced. It is all due to the actions taken by the states and territories. This state has taken those measures; Queensland has taken them and New South Wales is about to take them. The measures that have been put in place are having a substantial effect on greenhouse gas emissions. It is the Labor states that are taking this initiative and not the commonwealth. When we talk about greenhouse gas emissions, it is only the state Labor governments that are doing something positive. This state government is taking a range of measures. My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is introducing measures for more efficient public transport. The government has proposals regarding the sustainability of houses. Many initiatives are being taken by the state. They are opposed by the commonwealth because the commonwealth does not care about this very important issue. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 326. Dr S.C. THOMAS to the Minister for the Environment: I have a supplementary question. Why did the minister claim that he did not know that references to Western Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions were included in the budget estimates when both the federal government and the Environmental Protection Authority did know?
3504 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Mr M. McGOWAN replied: The member for Capel did not listen to what I had to say. We are going to put in place a mechanism by which we can determine accurately what industries in this state are producing. The commonwealth’s figures are based on voluntary reporting, which means that the figures are wildly inaccurate. The opposition’s solution to this problem is to build nuclear power stations in the suburbs. As we know, if the Liberal Party had its way, the Sunset site would not have an aged persons’ hostel, it would have a nuclear power station! AIRPORT LAND - PROPOSED BRICKWORKS 327. Ms J.A. RADISICH to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: I understand that there have been developments concerning the approval of the brickworks site at Perth airport. Can the minister please advise where the commonwealth process is at? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I acknowledge the role that has been played in this by so many local members. They include the members for Swan Hills, Midland and Belmont. The federal member has no luck; he has certainly been dealt a very bad hand by his federal colleagues. We now know that the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage has made his report on the environmental assessment of the BGC brickworks proposal. However, we do not know what is in it because he and the federal Minister for Transport and Regional Services, Hon Warren Truss, have made it very clear that it is a secret report and that the report will not be made public. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: I want to contrast that with the hypothetical situation in which the application related to a brickworks site across the road and outside airport land. What would have happened? We would have had an assessment by the Environmental Protection Authority. The assessment would have led to a published report and a published bulletin of recommendations. Those would have then been subject to an appeals process. It would then have been subject to an examination by the Appeals Convener. It would then have gone to our esteemed Minister for the Environment, and a public decision on the matter would have been made. However, because the proposal is on commonwealth land, we do not even know the attitude to the application taken by the commonwealth. All the feedback and the vibes we are getting from the federal ministers indicate that the second-hand East German plant, which may be 15 years old, has captured their imagination. It appears that the application will most likely be approved. Another aspect of this - Mr T. Buswell interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: We can see who has been funding the opposition’s 500 Club. Another matter of great concern is that there is limited capacity for the commonwealth to enforce any conditions that are put on it. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the members for Vasse and Cottesloe to order for the first time. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: It is good to see Lenny’s little boys doing his bidding. We have this nice second- hand plant from East Germany. We on this side of the house are obviously concerned that the opposition, if it got into government, would race off to the Ukraine and buy a second-hand nuclear plant and try to put it on defence land in Bullsbrook. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the members for Vasse and Cottesloe to order for the second time.
FOOD LABELLING LAWS - COMPLIANCE 328. Mr D.T. REDMAN to the Premier: I refer to the new food labelling requirements issued by Food Standards Australia New Zealand for fresh produce, and media reports that some retailers are not complying with these laws. Given the confusion regarding responsibility for enforcement, I ask - (1) What resources will the Premier put in place to ensure that supermarket chains are labelling fresh produce according to the new requirements? (2) Will the Premier admit that, without adequate enforcement, the new laws are essentially useless?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3505
(3) Will the Premier support the Nationals’ call for three food auditors to be employed by the Department of Agriculture and Food in order to ensure compliance with the labelling requirements? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for Stirling for the question. Before I go to the detail of the question, I take it that the member for Stirling would be very interested in the circumstances of the Albany port? Mr D.T. Redman: Yes. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: He should be advocating that the commonwealth government do something about its responsibility to clean up the bombs. Mr P.D. Omodei: It’s about food! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I know the question is about food. The commonwealth government has other responsibilities but it is washing its hands of the fact that there unexploded bombs in Albany Harbour. This is the government that expects WA to have some faith in nuclear issues. A second-hand brick factory is being imported from East Germany. Next thing we will have a second-hand power plant from the Ukraine being stuck on airport land. We have a commonwealth government that does not accept its responsibilities. (1)-(3) In relation to the question, the Minister for Agriculture and Food is handling this matter for the government. With no disrespect to the previous Minister for Primary Industry, who was a member of the National Party and was a very good minister, the current Minister for Agriculture is an exceptionally good minister and I have great confidence that he will make sure that the state fulfils its obligations. We need the commonwealth to fulfil its obligations as well.
SMOKING BAN - PUBS AND CLUBS 329. Mr B.S. WYATT to the Minister for Health: With smoking to be banned inside all pubs and clubs next month, can the minister inform the house what the state government is doing to alert the public to this very significant and welcome change? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: I thank the member for Victoria Park for a question that I hope I can answer. From the end of next month, smoking will be banned in all pubs, bars, nightclubs and sporting clubs throughout Western Australia. We will be one of the first states in Australia to have achieved this very important public health milestone. Not only that but, uniquely for Australia, it has been done with the full support of public health organisations and the industry and unions involved, in particular, the Australian Hotels Association. As part of the banning of smoking in pubs and clubs, those industry and health groups will undertake a substantial TV, print and radio campaign to inform the public of the changes and to reinforce the fact that hospitality venues will be even more welcoming when they become smoke free. That publicity campaign has had $530 000 allocated to it. The message will be a very simple one - with these major changes in smoking regulation and the severing of that link between hospitality and enjoyment, on the one hand, and smoking on the other, there has never been a better time to give up smoking. The quit message will be there, loud and clear. Of course, reducing smoking is more than just implementing bans. The Tobacco Products Control Act, which passed through Parliament in March this year, will give the government tremendous power to reduce the availability of tobacco products, particularly to minors, and to further limit the scope of tobacco advertising. Members may not be aware that, two weeks ago, the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Council on Smoking and Health issued their annual report on smoking and stated that Western Australia was leading the nation in combating smoking, with the most comprehensive tobacco control laws in the nation. The Western Australian government was awarded top points by the AMA, which stated that the Western Australian government had done great things in its commitment to tobacco control, and was following up words with action. Western Australia has the lowest rate of smoking among adults in the nation. The proportion of the population smoking is down from 20.1 per cent in 2001 to 15.5 per cent this year. That is a remarkable achievement, but it stands in stark contrast to the position of the Liberal Party. Last week, the member for Dawesville tried to get in on the antismoking juggernaut launched by this government by trumpeting a plan to ban smoking in cars carrying children. Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not want to hear this, does he? The very next day, the member for Hillarys, very sensibly in my view, poured cold water on the proposal of the member for Dawesville, saying that he supported education rather than legislation to stop adults smoking in cars carrying children. The West Australian’s columnist Paul Murray described the Liberal Party proposition as “Nanny State”. He called upon the Liberals to scrap this stupid idea, and went on to say that there is nothing
3506 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] sillier than the Parliament passing laws that will not be policed correctly. Of course, this was just the member for Dawesville off on his own, because the Liberal Party has not endorsed his proposal. He got his cheap headline, but where is the legislation? He said last week that he would be introducing it into Parliament this week. Where is it? Dr K.D. Hames: Watch this space! Mr J.A. McGINTY: There is something more unusual about the Liberal Party. The Australian Electoral Commission’s register of donations made to political parties shows that, in February 2005, during the course of the state election campaign, the Liberal Party of Western Australia received $13 517 from British American Tobacco Australia Ltd. According to the records, this donation was in the form of a paid secondment of Ms Caroline Denyer, an employee of British American Tobacco. The Liberal Party did not do what was required by law and disclose that donation from the tobacco company concerned. I suggest members opposite go back and have a good look at the records and make sure that that is corrected now. On the one hand, the Liberal Party is secretly accepting donations from tobacco companies and not declaring those donations, and on the other it goes for cheap headlines that it will not follow up with legislation. I ask members to contrast that with the action of this government on the tobacco question and the national recognition that has received. MAGISTRATE ANTOINE BLOEMEN 330. Ms S.E. WALKER to the Attorney General: I refer to the Attorney General’s recent appointment of Kimberley Magistrate Antoine Bloemen, who recently turned 65 and, under the Magistrates Court Act 2004, is no longer eligible to sit as a magistrate. (1) Under what power and on what basis has the Attorney General now appointed Magistrate Bloemen as an acting magistrate, and for what jurisdiction? (2) Is Magistrate Bloemen still the resident magistrate for the Kimberley region? (3) Pursuant to schedule 1, clause 9 of the Magistrates Court Act, what is his period of service and what are the terms and conditions of his appointment? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) Magistrate Antoine Bloemen is a remarkable magistrate serving the people, particularly the people of the Kimberley region of Western Australia. I have had approaches from a number of people in the Kimberley, including the Aboriginal communities in the Kimberley and, in fact, the member for Kimberley herself, urging that Magistrate Bloemen in the Kimberley be allowed to extend his term of appointment beyond the age of 65 years, which is the usual retirement age for magistrates. Mr T.G. Stephens: I, as the member for Central Kimberley-Pilbara, also made those representations. Mr J.A. McGINTY: That is right: the member for Central Kimberley-Pilbara did, too. A vast number of submissions were made to me urging me to extend the term of Magistrate Bloemen. The Kimberley is a difficult region of Western Australia from a law enforcement perspective; it is quite different from things here in Perth. When Magistrate Bloemen did unorthodox things, he had my 100 per cent support. When he sought to address offending behaviour in the Kimberley by saying to a persistent young offender, “If you stay out of trouble for three months, I’ll buy you a bike”, he had my 100 per cent support, because this is about reducing offending, and this is what Magistrate Bloemen does with the support of the vast bulk of people in the Kimberley region. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr J.A. McGINTY: To answer the specific question, I had no difficulty in recommending and authorising the extension of Magistrate Bloemen’s term. The Magistrates Court Act enables the Attorney General of the day to extend the term of a magistrate who would otherwise be caught by the age 65 retirement provision. Ms S.E. Walker: For what purpose? Mr J.A. McGINTY: To be a magistrate. Ms S.E. Walker: Why? For what reason? Mr J.A. McGINTY: To continue working as a magistrate. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Magistrate Bloemen has had a two-year extension of his term. He will remain the magistrate for the Kimberley for that period, unless some unexpected cause intervenes. That has been done with the overwhelming support of the people of the Kimberley and for everyone who is interested in reducing the rate of offending.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3507
MAGISTRATE ANTOINE BLOEMEN 331. Ms S.E. WALKER to the Attorney General: I have a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order! Ms S.E. WALKER: Is the Attorney General aware that the reappointment of Magistrate Bloemen has caused all community stakeholders great concern for the administration of justice in the Kimberley? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: No. NORTH WEST CAPE-NINGALOO REEF AREA - WORLD HERITAGE LISTING 332. Mr T.G. STEPHENS to the Minister for the Environment: I refer to this government’s proposal to have the North West Cape-Ningaloo Reef area World Heritage listed. What has been the position of the commonwealth Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Senator the Hon Ian Campbell, on this proposal? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: I thank the member for the question. This government’s view is that that part of the world, the Ningaloo-Cape Range area - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I ask the minister to take a seat. I call to order the members for Nedlands and Capel. Mr M. McGOWAN: Our view is that this part of the world is very beautiful and is worthy of nomination for World Heritage listing, as is Shark Bay and as is - Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER: I ask the minister to take a seat. I call to order the member for Nedlands for the second time. Mr M. McGOWAN: Mr Speaker, when the member for Nedlands speaks, I am reminded of what Gareth Evans had to say about Bronwyn Bishop when he was asked why he took an instant dislike to her. The answer was: it saves time. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr M. McGOWAN: The Ningaloo-Cape Range area is a magnificent part of the world and we are totally supportive of its nomination for World Heritage listing. Senator Campbell has taken the view that if one pastoral leaseholder objects, no matter how ill-informed that leaseholder is, Senator Campbell will not support its World Heritage listing and, therefore, it will not proceed. This is despite the fact that the Pastoralists and Graziers Association has said that it supports our approach to this issue and that it will not - Dr S.C. Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN: I have the Pastoralists and Graziers Association press release right here with me. The Pastoralists and Graziers Association supports our approach and it does not believe that World Heritage listing will adversely impact on the activities of pastoralists. The wet tropics in north Queensland is a heritage area and has 100 leaseholders situated within it, all of whom are still operating. The commonwealth position is difficult to understand. Western Australia comprises one-third of the continent and has within it some of the most beautiful places on earth. Despite that fact, Western Australia has two World Heritage sites, and the rest of the country has about 13. It is about time our spectacularly beautiful part of the country was given that listing. It is about time Senator Campbell got off the easy issues, such as whaling, and started dealing with some serious issues in Western Australia. LIQUOR STORES - SUNDAY TRADING 333. Mr J. McGRATH to the Minister for Health: Given that the minister responsible for liquor licensing conveniently deferred to the Minister for Health’s department so as not to answer the following question about his portfolio during the Geraldton sitting of state Parliament, I ask -
3508 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(1) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is currently before the Supreme Court opposing the Sunday trading approval granted to Subi Cleanskins in Subiaco, a business run by a young couple with a baby who have already spent $40 000 defending this case? (2) Is the minister aware that the Department of Health is also opposing an extended trading permit for Wongan Liquor in Wongan Hills? (3) Will the minister please advise the house on the implications of this action by the Department of Health for the government’s plans to deregulate Sunday trading hours and allow liquor stores in the metropolitan area to trade on Sundays? (4) Why are the minister’s department and the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor moving in different directions on the issue of Sunday trading? (5) Why is the Department of Health wasting scarce resources pursuing this matter in direct opposition to the government’s own policy regarding liquor stores trading on Sundays? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(5) I am aware of the two applications that the Department of Health is currently challenging in the Supreme Court as a result of determinations by either the Director of Liquor Licensing or the Liquor Licensing Court. The Department of Health is required to enforce the law as it stands, and the law as it stands is clear on this issue. We as a government want to change that law, but we do not stop enforcing or prosecuting the law in those areas when a proposition - there is not even legislation before the Parliament at this time - has been floated. When the law changes, the departmental approach will change to reflect that law. Mr J. McGrath: Why can’t we defer, just generally? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Because we do not even have legislation currently in the Parliament. In my view, the question of harm associated with the consumption of alcohol is a very real issue, and it must be administered in accordance with the current law. I appreciate the point that the member is making; that is, the Department of Health opposing, purely on health grounds and nothing else, the granting of Sunday trading permits for these two liquor stores is not something that could or should be pursued if the law is changed. However, at the moment the law is quite clear. I fully support my department enforcing the current law until such time as the law is changed.
LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - INVESTIGATION AND DISCIPLINE REFORM Petition MR G.M. CASTRILLI (Bunbury) [2.52 pm]: I have a petition from 615 petitioners. A similar petition with about 2 000 signatures was lodged last year. The petition reads - To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned, are deeply concerned with the unreliable manner in which legal practitioners are investigated and disciplined in Western Australia and call for urgent accountable legal reform in this area of grave concern. The signatures on this petition are a protest on behalf of the West Australian community who are in favour of new open, transparent, deterrent accountable legal reform legislation (laws) urgently needed for the discipline of lawyers in Western Australia. Recommended is a new Code of Conduct Act possibly adapted from the Law Society’s Professional Conduct rules which currently governs the Conduct of Legal practitioners in Western Australia. Also recommended is an Independent Authority completely independent of the control of the Western Australian Legal Profession to replace “The Legal Practitioners Complaints Committee (LPCC) the statutory body charged with complaint investigation into the conduct of a lawyer in Western Australia. Most complaints made by the general public against unruly lawyers are never resolved by the LPCC. Less than 5% of lawyers accused of unethical and illegal behaviour are penalised by the LPCC. (This figure is taken from the LPCC annual reports 2000-2004). CAESER JUDGING CAESER JUST DOES NOT WORK The sitting members constituents cannot tell the difference between the good honest lawyer and an unruly lawyer when in need of legal services. The Queensland government has implemented similar legislation to what is sort in this petition.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3509
Now we ask that the Legislative Assembly urge the Government in the best interest of all West Australians to do everything in its power to fast track these stated legal reforms including a parliamentary committee to thoroughly investigate the required concerns. [See petition 118.] PAPERS TABLED Papers were tabled and ordered to lie upon the table of the house. BILLS Notices of Motions for Leave to Introduce 1. Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill 2006. Notice of motion given by Mr J.C. Kobelke (Minister for Police and Emergency Services). 2. Gas and Electricity Safety Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. Notice of motion given by Mr F.M. Logan (Minister for Energy). KIMBERLEY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE Notice of Motion MS S.E. WALKER (Nedlands) [2.57 pm]: I give notice that at the next sitting of the house I will move - That the Labor government take immediate action to ensure the proper administration of law in the Kimberley district magistrate’s jurisdiction. Mr J.A. McGinty: Are you trying to undermine the judiciary again? Ms S.E. WALKER: I am sorry to scare the Attorney General. The SPEAKER: Order, members! CHILDREN IN FOSTER CARE AND CHILD CARE - NOTICE OF MOTION Removal of Notice - Statement by Speaker THE SPEAKER (Hon F. Riebeling): I advise members that private members’ notice of motion 13, notice of which was given on 15 November 2005, will be removed from the next notice paper unless written notification is provided to the Clerk requesting that the notice be continued. BILLS Appropriations Messages from the Governor received and read recommending appropriations for the purposes of the following bills - 1. Revenue Laws Amendment Bill 2006. 2. Water Resources Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. 3. Family Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. BILLS Assent Message from the Governor received and read notifying assent to the following bills - 1. Superannuation Legislation Amendment and Validation Bill 2006. 2. Treasurer’s Advance Authorisation Bill 2006. BILLS Returned 1. Gene Technology Bill 2005. 2. Medical Radiation Technologists Bill 2005. 3. State Flag Bill 2006. 4. Health Amendment Bill 2005. Bills returned from the Council without amendment. 5. Commonwealth Powers (De Facto Relationships) Bill 2005. Bill returned from the Council with an amendment.
3510 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
DRAFT CONSUMER CREDIT (WESTERN AUSTRALIA) CODE AMENDMENT ORDER 2006 Assembly’s Resolution - Council’s Concurrence Message from the Council received and read notifying that it had concurred with the Assembly’s resolution.
ROYAL COMMISSIONS (POWERS) AMENDMENT BILL 2005 Receipt Bill received from the Council.
LAND INFORMATION AUTHORITY BILL 2006 Notice of Motion Postponed On motion by Mr J.C. Kobelke (Leader of the House), resolved - That bills notice of motion 1 be postponed to the next day of sitting.
APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED FUND) BILL (NO. 1) 2006 APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED FUND) BILL (NO. 2) 2006 Estimates Committees A and B Reports and Minutes - Presentation MRS D.J. GUISE (Wanneroo - Deputy Speaker) [3.04 pm]: I present the report and the minutes of Estimates Committees A and B. [See papers 1581 and 1582.] Estimates Committee A Report - Adoption MRS D.J. GUISE (Wanneroo - Deputy Speaker) [3.04 pm]: I move - That the report of Estimates Committee A be adopted. The committee considered and recommended the appropriations for the divisions indicated in the report. The operation of Estimates Committee A worked well. Once again, the use of the call sheet by the Acting Speakers enabled them, as Chairmen, to keep a good record of members seeking the call while allowing a reasonable number of follow-up questions on items. Chairmen were also instructed to endeavour to ensure that opposition shadow ministers received the first call and that other committee members were given opportunities to explore lines of questioning. Additional time was allocated this year for off-budget authorities. In committee A one hour was allocated to the Water Corporation, and 45 minutes to Racing and Wagering Western Australia. These sessions ran well and I am sure that members were appreciative of the additional time allocated to those off- budget items. I also noted this year that the opposition committee membership was made up of members of the Liberal Party, the National Party and an Independent for many of the divisions. That appeared to work well, and I commend members opposite for the level of cooperation shown in that committee membership. A matter brought to my attention related to the appointment of committee members for specific divisions and difficulties that can occur when divisions covered are broad and not defined by a certain time slot. One example was the time allocated for the Minister for Water Resources and Minister for Sport and Recreation. Two hours were allocated but no definitive time was allocated to the separate portfolios. Given the very different nature of the subject matter, it is reasonable to expect that, just as the advisers change, the members of the committee may also wish to change. I suggest that this matter be given consideration by the management committee next year, because accommodating such a change would provide valuable assistance to the respective Whips in their endeavour to fairly allocate committee time to members who are interested in specific divisions. Over all, 170 advisers attended Estimates Committee A. It was apparent that any member of the public dressed in a suit and tie who inadvertently came into view of the estimates committee was clearly in a very dangerous position because it seemed that some ministers were very eager to ensure that all their advisers were present and accounted for and they eagerly sought the participation of anyone so dressed! Perhaps ministers need to take notice of that. I should perhaps warn members of the public that if they are dressed in a certain way they might find themselves on the floor of the chamber advising us! I will leave it to members present to decide whether our deliberations could benefit from such participation! As is the usual practice, I will go through the number of questions asked and answered by committee members in the following divisions. When I refer to the “opposition”, I am referring to the committee members on the opposition side of the chamber. On Monday: Parliament, division 1, took 47 minutes, the opposition asked 21 questions, and government members asked seven; the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administrative Investigations, division 2, 13 minutes, opposition four, government three; Water Resources, division 23, one
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3511 hour seven minutes, opposition 34, government one; Sport and Recreation, division 24, 44 minutes, opposition 12, government eight; WA Sport Centre Trust, division 25, six minutes, opposition four, government nil; and the Water Corporation, the off-budget authority I referred to earlier, took one hour, and the opposition asked 24 questions and the government asked five. On Tuesday: Department for Planning and Infrastructure, division 39, services 1, 3 and 4, one hour 20 minutes, opposition 21, government nine; WA Planning Commission, division 42, 19 minutes, opposition five, government two; Commissioner of Main Roads, division 40, one hour seven minutes, opposition 21, government eight; Public Transport Authority of WA, division 41, 57 minutes, opposition 18, government seven; Premier and Cabinet, division 3, services 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 9, one hour 55 minutes, opposition 28, government 12; Industry and Resources, division 4, service 3, 50 minutes, opposition 19, government three; Office of Shared Services, division 5, 27 minutes, opposition nine, government three; Governor’s Establishment, division 6, 11 minutes, opposition five, government three; Office of the Public Sector Standards Commissioner, division 7, 19 minutes, opposition six, government two; Salaries and Allowances Tribunal, division 8, nil; Attorney General, division 26, two hours 10 minutes, opposition 33, government 12; Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, division 27, five minutes, opposition four, government one; Corruption and Crime Commission, division 28, 16 minutes, opposition seven, government three; Parliamentary Inspector of the Corruption and Crime Commission, division 29, two minutes, opposition nil, government one; Law Reform Commission of WA, division 30, five minutes, opposition nil, government one; Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, division 31, 10 minutes, opposition six, government one; Office of the Information Commissioner, division 32, nil; WA Electoral Commission, division 34, 10 minutes, opposition three, government three. On Wednesday: Education and Training, division 19, four hours 17 minutes, opposition 97, government 14; Country High Schools Hostels Authority, division 20, 20 minutes, opposition seven, government five; Curriculum Council, division 21, one hour five minutes, opposition 33, government seven; Education Services, division 22, four minutes, opposition one, government nil; Health, division 33 - another big portfolio area - five hours, opposition 69, government 40. On Thursday: Treasury and Finance, division 9, two hours 32 minutes, opposition 51, government eight; Office of Native Title, division 10, 15 minutes, opposition seven, government two; Office of the Auditor General, division 11, opposition four, government nil; Economic Regulation Authority, division 12, opposition five, government nil; Lotteries Commission - an off-budget authority - 45 minutes, opposition nine, government two; Conservation and Land Management, division 46, one hour five minutes, opposition 15, government nine; Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority, division 47, nil; Environment, division 48, 46 minutes, opposition 10, government eight; Swan River Trust, division 49, opposition 10, government two; Zoological Parks Authority, division 50, opposition one, government three; Racing, Gaming and Liquor, division 51, opposition 11, government two; Racing and Wagering Western Australia - an off-budget authority - 45 minutes, opposition 17, government two. I am advised that 65 requests were made for supplementary information and only one response remains outstanding. It is expected this week. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the Chairmen who assisted during the week in Estimates Committee A for a job well done, and also to participating members for their cooperation. I especially thank the Legislative Assembly staff who helped ensure that the committee ran smoothly and that the Chairmen were well supported. MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe) [3.13 pm]: I would like to make some comments on the conduct of the estimates committees. I thank the staff and Chairmen who worked long hours through those two committees. As an overall comment, I think the estimates committees worked reasonably well. There is no doubt, as has just been stated, that a large number of questions were asked, and in most cases they were answered fairly and to the best of the ability of the minister or the minister’s advisers. There were a few occasions on which ministers chose to talk at length about unrelated issues. It did not happen as much as in previous years, but it is something this Parliament could really do without. I would like to make some broader comments about estimates and some of the things that did not work so well. I do not mean that in a negative way but as a constructive contribution. First, the estimates committee is seen by all of us as something to get through. From a government’s perspective, it looks forward to the week being over and done with. To some extent the attitude can be the same in opposition. I dare say it can be the same for the staff of the Parliament, too. That is a problem because there is an undercurrent of thought in this Parliament that estimates is something to get through. It should not be. Improvements have been made but we should give some more thought to improving the estimates committee process. The estimates are important to the parliamentary calendar. It is an important process for scrutiny and accountability. An effective modern Parliament that is contemporary and relates to the community on real issues will do what it can to improve the estimates process. A very good example of that is the federal Senate estimates process, which has gradually gained increasing stature in the federal Parliament. We should think the same here.
3512 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Members on both sides of the house generally participated well in the estimates committees. Most ministers answered the questions appropriately. Some were excessive and verbose in their answers. The sign of a good minister is one who can answer a question accurately and quickly. They are invariably the effective ministers and the ones who go down as having performed well in their portfolios. A lot of supplementary material was agreed to by ministers and, as has just been said by the Deputy Speaker, all but one of those questions have been answered over a two-week period. I think that is acceptable; in fact, it is commendable. The inclusion of off-budget agencies, which has now become a feature of the estimates committees, is a good innovation. I think it probably worked better this year than it did previously. I think we are all pretty well used now to the accrual system and the outcomes structure and performance- managing style of the budget papers themselves. I make two suggestions, and these are probably directed more at the Treasurer. Two things should be more explicit: firstly, the levels of staffing in government departments and agencies. One should not have to search for a footnote to find out how many FTEs a department has. Given that probably two-thirds of government spending is on salaries and wages, staffing levels and a recent history of changes in those levels should form an integral part of the budget papers. They should not be hidden in the footnotes. The second thing, which is a little more complicated, is there should be a statement on the mix of federal and state funding in various programs, maybe not by individual program but broadly across the department. For example, in the Department for Community Development it would be far easier to disentangle the various programs and objectives if there were a clear statement of the relative shares of state and federal funding. It would also be public information of value. Most people, particularly if they have held ministerial positions, are continually trying to come to grips with the mix of federal and state funding and often try to put it into some perspective. My own experience in education was that I had to continually remind some of our federal colleagues that, while I appreciated their interest, they provided only about 10 per cent of funding for government schools. That is about where their relative importance should lie. Therefore, we should include staffing levels and make them explicit, and make state-federal funding of programs explicit on an agency basis. There were some problems with the estimates timetable, which have been referred to. Most of those problems came from continual changes to the timetable leading up to the time at which we were about to begin. I think we have to get rid of that; we cannot have that. It is not good enough. I say to ministers, having been one for eight years, that it is not good enough to decide that they have an appointment or meeting and want to shoot off somewhere, and therefore the parliamentary timetable should change. I am sorry, but ministers are probably the easiest group to fit in with Parliament. The timetable for the budget estimates should be determined by the government of the day at least a couple of weeks in advance and ministers should stick to it. It was unacceptable that changes were made to the schedule up to the actual day of the estimates because a minister had to attend a meeting. Ministers are responsible to this Parliament. Mr J.C. Kobelke: That was not a factor in setting the timetable. The issue was the changing of portfolios. Mr C.J. BARNETT: I accept that. However, many changes were made, which was confusing. Another aspect related to that is the way this government has structured government departments, which makes the estimates committee proceedings more difficult. For example, the Department of Industry and Resources is effectively spread across three ministers. That makes it difficult to conduct the estimates committee. A single agency has three ministers. The major point I make is the use of the Legislative Assembly committee room. The staff, ministers and parliamentarians tried to make the best of it and they tried to make it work. However, no matter what anyone says, it did not work. There is no point pretending otherwise. It was crowded, messy and confusing, and it lacked formality and dignity. The estimates committee of Parliament should be a formal, dignified and properly functioning forum. It was anything but that in the Legislative Assembly committee room; it just did not work. Members were mixed up. It was not possible to tell the government members from the opposition members and it was not obvious who was the minister and who was the member chairing the committee. There were no obvious signs to identify members. At one stage I saw cans of Coke, potato chips and coffee mugs on the table. It looked like anything but a proper, formal parliamentary process. I ask the government to please not ever entertain that idea again. I understand that the reason the hearings were held in that room is that the Legislative Council chamber was not available for use. However, we cannot afford to go down the path of holding the estimates in that Legislative Assembly committee room again. Parliament would be far better to improve the estimates committee overall - as I have been saying, although some members will argue against it - by holding one estimates committee conducted in this chamber over two weeks. I suggest that six members from the government and six members from the opposition form part of the estimates process and that any other member of Parliament who chooses to participate be able to do so. Frankly, if it means that the Parliament should sit for one more week, even if it sits during a week of school holidays, so be it. It is not that onerous. There should be one estimates committee. The government will talk about its
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3513 budget and its spending programs, as governments do. However, I remind members that all members of Parliament approve the spending of public funds. If we do not avail ourselves of the opportunity to participate in the scrutiny of spending some $14 billion, we are failing in one of our primary duties. We should conduct the committee as one estimates committee over two weeks in this chamber. That would be a far better and more formal process. Another recommendation I will make, which we could adopt from the Senate process, is that members of Parliament should be able to ask questions directly of either the minister or the chief executive officer of a department. Members of Parliament should not be able to ask questions of anyone else, and certainly not ministerial staff. However, they should be able to direct questions to either the minister or the CEO of the agency or department concerned. If the CEO did not wish to answer the question or thought that the question was political in nature, the CEO could defer to the minister and vice versa. Members of Parliament should be allowed to ask questions directly of the CEO of a government department. How the CEO answered the question, and indeed if the CEO wished to answer the question, would be up to the CEO. That would give a lot more relevance to the estimates committee. Ministers should have confidence in their CEOs. When I was a minister, I always preferred Des Kelly to answer a question on resources development rather than me because he knew more about it. Likewise, I preferred Peter Browne to answer questions on education because he knew about schools and learning. It is not a threat to ministerial prowess to do that. A good minister would be happy for a CEO to answer questions, particularly if the questions were factual, departmental, technical or professional-type questions. The minister and the CEO should have a close enough relationship to decide whether a question required a factual answer or whether the question was political. That would be worth doing. The Legislative Assembly committee room should not be used in the future to conduct the estimates hearings. It was embarrassing for this Parliament and it should not be done again. We should have one estimates committee and spread its proceedings over two weeks. We should sit during a week of school holidays if that is what it takes. The chairmen of committees should be nominated and members should be allowed to ask questions directly of the minister and the CEO. I urge ministers, no matter from what side of politics, to continue to do what generally happened this time; that is, to answer questions as well as they are able and as quickly as they are able. I thank the staff and the chairman of the committees. It was a better estimates committee process than that of the estimates committees that have been conducted over the past few years. However, there is much to be done to get members over the psyche of believing that the estimates hearings are something they must get through. The estimates hearings must be made a significant part of the parliamentary year. MR P.D. OMODEI (Warren-Blackwood - Leader of the Opposition) [3.25 pm]: I will be brief. I endorse the comments made by the member for Cottesloe. I thank the member for Wanneroo for the way in which she handled the committees of which she was the chairman and for her general demeanour. This year the opposition asked more questions than in previous years and the government allowed the opposition more flexibility to follow a line of questioning. Opposition shadow ministers should be able to continue to pursue a line of questioning rather than have to wait until six or seven other members have asked a question before being able to follow-up the initial question. In the interest of receiving a good response to the estimates committee process, it would be better for the chair to allow that type of flexibility. I must admit that that did occur to some extent. The member for Wanneroo informed us of the number of questions asked by opposition members compared with the number asked by government members. Most of the questions asked by the government members were much longer than those asked by opposition members. The member for Cottesloe may have already mentioned that the length of ministers’ answers took up a lot of time. I do not know whether that was a deliberate tactic. Like the member for Cottesloe, I believe that the estimates committees are an opportunity for the minister of the day to prove his or her stripes and to prove that the minister is across the portfolio. They allow the opposition to cross-examine ministers as much as they like. When I was a minister, I welcomed the estimates committee process. It is a good opportunity to put on the record the achievements of the government and the initiatives that are intended for the future. If we can shorten the length of questions and answers - some of them were inordinately long - Mrs D.J. Guise: It is always a challenge. Mr P.D. OMODEI: It is a challenge, whoever is in government. However, there was an improvement this year, certainly in the flexibility the chair gave to opposition members to pursue a line of questioning, which I welcome. The area of off-budget agencies could be expanded. Obviously a large number of off-budget agencies are not normally part of the estimates committee process. I am sure that the agencies would welcome the Parliament scrutinising what they are doing. The member for Cottesloe raised the issue of full-time equivalents. The opposition should be able to scrutinise the issue of FTEs far more broadly. The suggestion that opposition members be able to directly ask questions of the heads of a department or of CEOs is positive. Invariably when a minister is not across a portfolio, the
3514 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] minister must defer to the head of the department or another adviser anyway. I agree with the member for Cottesloe. CEOs should be across all areas of their responsibility and it is important for them to establish themselves in the overall scheme of things. This year was an improvement on the estimates committee process, although there certainly is more room for improvement. The issue of the Legislative Assembly committee room must be addressed. We must make use of this chamber for a longer time or use this chamber and the Legislative Council chamber. The government should be able to organise the Legislative Council so that it is not sitting during the week of the budget estimates so that the Legislative Council chamber can be used. Some options are available. We will approach those issues in the spirit of ensuring that we can get a better result from the estimates hearings. I thank members again for their cooperation. MR M.W. TRENORDEN (Avon) [3.30 pm]: Mr Acting Speaker (Mr P.B. Watson), I will not get onto your favourite topic, which is the strength of the Melbourne backline and its capacity to rebound! The ACTING SPEAKER: The member is getting very close to a point of order. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I thought you would be wearing a black tie, Mr Acting Speaker. The ACTING SPEAKER: It was a great soccer result. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I will take a few minutes to express my appreciation for the service to the state of Des Pearson, who recently announced that he will be moving on to be the Auditor General of Victoria. The state has been outstandingly served by Des Pearson as Auditor General. I may not have been the Chair but I was certainly a member of the Public Accounts Committee when Des Pearson was appointed Auditor General. He has significantly changed the role of the office of Auditor General in this state, and overwhelmingly for the better. He has strongly interacted with Auditors General in other jurisdictions to constantly review his role, which is a great credit to him. I am sure that he will do Victoria a great deal of good. It is a pity that we will not have his services, but we have had the benefit of his services for approximately 15 years. I will probably not have an opportunity when the time comes, but I am sure that government members will express their recognition of the role played by the Auditor General. I rate him extremely highly. Most members of the chamber will understand that I am not a great fan of the estimates committee process. However, I noticed two encouraging aspects this year. I agree with the previous comments made about the Chairs, not only with regard to the particular Chair who was pointed out. On every occasion when I sat on the committee the Chairs did a very good, balanced job, and I appreciated it. It has not always been the case. I instantly recognise that it is not easy to chair such meetings when one’s colleagues can be a quite boisterous part of the process. I also thank the backbench members of government. On the whole I thought the way in which they approached the estimates committee process was very reasonable. Many government backbench members recognise that the estimates committee process is an opportunity for the opposition, and they were not over- possessive of the time. I want to put that on the record. During the two full days on which I sat on the committee, I consider that to have happened. Those were very positive matters. They mean that the members are trying to make the estimates process in this place much better. However, I will argue at a later date about adopting a different method. Although I missed the first few comments of the member for Cottesloe, and I will read Hansard to see what he said, I agree in general with the matters he raised. I want to raise a few matters of my own. I do not pick on the Minister for Energy, who is not in the chamber, and it may well be that I would have done it were I a minister, but I do not think that it should be part of the mechanism of the estimates process for members to ask a dorothy dix question and the minister to then read a prepared statement. All ministers do it. I congratulate Chairs who allow ministers to make only one or two of those statements. However, it is not part of the function of estimates committees. They are about the budget; they are not an opportunity for ministers to run out something that is good for them. Ministers have the opportunity to make three-minute statements at the beginning of each sitting day, and they can make 20-minute statements if they so wish. I know the temptation is there because it is an opportunity to get information to the media, and I do not pick on particular ministers for doing it, but it is not a function of the estimates process, so we should try to curtail it. I will be working on those issues and talking to many members about them. I realise that the Minister for Small Business is a brand new minister and very enthusiastic, but I draw attention to the time available for the small business portfolio and the length of the answer he gave to the first question as a portion of that time available. The Leader of the Opposition a few minutes ago raised the question of the time that was taken up by answers. It does not matter very much that the minister was enthusiastic and took 10 to 15 minutes to answer the question because he thought the information was important. The problem is that six other members sitting around the table during a 30 or 40-minute session who wanted to ask a question were cut out of the process. I do not pick on that minister in particular, but he is an example. Again that is not what the estimates process is supposed to be about.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3515
We must ask ourselves a very serious question. The debate has been going on for some time, but we always pass over the question. Do we want the passage of the budget to be a function of this house? Do we want to run the budget through this house and pass it in this house because the government is in this house, or do we want to allow the other place to control the budget? That is not happening, because my perception of the activities of the other place is that its members concentrate less on estimates. However, we should take absolute control of the budget process. There is no greater core issue in the governance of this place than the government introducing the budget and this house rigorously scrutinising it and passing it. What happens elsewhere is immaterial. Governments are formed and carried in this chamber, and nowhere else. It is absolutely critical, therefore, that we have a very good estimates process. That estimates process needs to be about the budget, not about the wants of the ministers, or even, on occasion, the needs of backbench members who want to raise a red herring. We must have a process in which the budget gets examined. I heard most of the speech of the member for Cottesloe. He made an excellent point, which I believe is absolutely critical. Any member of any standing committee of this place has the right to ask directly a question of any public servant right down to the tea lady. Therefore, why is it, when we sit as an estimates committee of this place, that we can ask only the minister a question? If we were to pull out of the estimates committee process and operate under the Public Accounts Committee or any other standing committee, committee members would have the right to ask questions directly of a public servant. Why do we not do that in the estimates committees? We should be seriously looking at that issue. I know why we do not do it, but the reason is political and not one of function. I will argue, as has the member for Cottesloe, that the current process protects weak ministers and not strong ministers. I have never seen a strong minister get into trouble during the estimates committee process. Any ministers who were even half across their portfolios would have no difficulty in an estimates committee. If we want this house to scrutinise the budget and its authority, we need to conduct the estimates process better. Time is an issue. I could not believe that when we were questioning the Minister for Energy, for example, we barely got started when the time was up. I know there is difficulty in pitching these matters, and I do not pick on the Leader of the House or his staff. In one year issues in a portfolio may be uncontroversial, but the next year things may hot up. It is very difficult to decide, therefore, how much of the week should be allocated to each portfolio. It is a problem when we are not able to ask all our questions. The answer is not to say that we can ask them in the house. If that was the answer, why not cut out estimates altogether and ask questions in the house? The estimates process is about examining the budget; it is not about political point scoring. It is meant to be a scrutiny of the budget. To improve that process, I have been speaking to a lot of people. I have spent several hours a week speaking to academics, members of this chamber, previous members of this chamber and the other place who have left in recent years and the Australian Society of Certified Practising Accountants. I have spoken to a raft of people about how we can improve not our processes but the information coming in. We can argue about our processes, as the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition just did, but I think we will substantially solve the problems of estimates if we can agree on the type of information that is included in the budget documents. I do not want to put these people on the spot, but 100 per cent of the people I spoke to, including the Under Treasurer, agree that we should do something different. The Under Treasurer did not say that directly, but he did say in another debate that he would be prepared to hear from me and talk about what happens. He quite correctly remarked that we are the clientele of the budget papers. If the budget papers do not suit the members of Parliament, they are not carrying out their function. I do not quite agree with that. I think Treasury does a fantastic job with the presentation of the budget papers, but they are prepared under the requirements of international reporting standards so that academics and others can look at them and compare us with any other state in Australia or places such as New Zealand or California. They can get a fair comparison because the budget papers are put together in a common format and follow an international standard. That is useful for the commentators of the world who want to see whether Western Australia is doing well and pick on points within the economy, but it is not useful in our process. Years ago when the Financial Administration and Audit Act 1985 came into force, there was a process of outcomes-based management that Treasury looked at for several years. Then it was thrown out. There were programs that were heavily oriented on performance indicators. We are now moving to key performance indicators. That is an unfinished process; it is a journey. If we are going to complete that journey, we need to move to a final audit, an outcome audit, of all programs. I am trying to convince a few academics to give us a hand in putting the information that is already in every agency in Western Australia into a separate document, on disc or in some other format that allows us to look at the core process of the state, whether we are talking about this budget or a budget 10 years hence. We need to identify programs so that members can follow that process. With performance audits, there is meant to be a mission statement for each agency within the Budget Statements. I actually picked on one of the agencies. Some people got pretty upset when I said that their mission statement was just a muddled statement, and it was. The point I was trying to make is that if we cannot work out what the mission is, how do we judge whether that
3516 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] program has done well? We are meant to have a strong statement of why a program starts and then we are meant to have performance indicators over the years of that program so that we can look at the performance audit to see that it is moving in the direction in which it is meant to head. None of us should be upset if partway through a five-year program an agency needs to change direction because things have changed or the information was not quite right. We should applaud that. That should not be a negative. If an agency needs to change its programs because of its internal examinations, we should say that that is good news. However, at the moment we do not know about that program-by-program process. I suggest that even backbench members do not know. All of us have issues in our electorates that are really important to us. I spent a few minutes with the Minister for Health talking about mental health. Mental health in the wheatbelt is really important to me. It would be good if I could follow the program of mental health in the state budget, but I cannot. In the current budget there is a program title and a global figure. I cannot tell the difference between what is happening in the wheatbelt and what is happening in Victoria Park, and nor can the member for Victoria Park. That is important. If we are going to function as members as Parliament, that is an important process. I will keep on pursuing my interests. I am a member of the Procedure and Privileges Committee. I will go to that committee with a point of view. I do not want to change the estimates process. I am very happy to argue the point with the member for Cottesloe. I think the process of the estimates committees is a problem of its own, particularly how many hours we sit and where we sit. All those things are our property and we will make the decision. The information that comes into the budget process is nowhere near adequate. I hope that the CPA, both the private division and the public division, will get into an Australia-wide debate about performance indicators, key performance indicators and outcome auditing. I think that two bills that are coming into this house are inappropriate. I will argue that at the time. The new audit act does not have outcome audits in it. I will argue that that is missing in the process. Also, the Auditor General Bill is deficient because the Auditor General will still be a part of the executive, will be paid by the executive and will be funded by the executive. I would also like to thank the Treasurer. He was a hardworking member of the Public Accounts Committee years ago when working on the bid for and the funding of the Auditor General. However, the bid for and the funding of the Auditor General is $730 000 out. There is a serious problem there. We will have that debate. The Treasurer has taken away the Auditor General’s ability to use A-grade auditors. He will make the Auditor General go to B-grade auditors for a cheaper price and a lower quality audit. That is a significant issue. The Treasurer and I will be having that debate within weeks. Mr E.S. Ripper: I knew I shouldn’t have given you that information. That was a mistake. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I hope that the Treasurer and I are relatively good friends. I would like to point out on a friendly basis that many of his hardworking public servants are now being headhunted by the B-graders in private industry to pick up these contracts. That is a fact. Mr C.J. Barnett: That leaves the C-graders. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: That is right. I do not want to be unfair to those private companies, but a range of private companies now see that they can get into contracting with the Auditor General even though they do not have the skills. Where do they get the skills? They go to the Treasurer’s people, offer them the money, put them into those businesses and then apply to the Auditor General to get those contracts at a lower rate. The Treasurer and I need to have a debate about this because he has not done the right thing. We can argue about not funding early reporting. The labour market factor of $560 000 is a highly critical issue that was cut out of the Auditor General’s budget. The quality of the audits will be down by several steps. That is of interest to this chamber and we will debate it at another time. However, that is not the purpose of today’s debate. I have said what I want to say, but I will come back to it and I would like to do it through a bipartisan process. I have spoken to many members on both sides of the house and I know there is general unhappiness about the way estimates hearings operate. Members do not mind that they take place over a week or so, but they want the process sharpened. The Leader of the House and I get on well and I hope I can talk to him about this some time in the future with a genuine attitude towards changing the process. Question put and passed. Estimates Committee B Report - Adoption MRS D.J. GUISE (Wanneroo - Deputy Speaker) [3.50 pm]: I move - That the report of Estimates Committee B be adopted. I thank members opposite for their comments; they were very valuable and we will take them into consideration in our further work on the estimates proceedings. To that extent, the work that the member for Avon in particular is undertaking with a view to consideration by the Procedure and Privileges Committee is very valuable.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3517
I wish to report specifically on Estimates Committee B, not only to put the statistics on the record but also to share my view on the worthiness or otherwise of undertaking those proceedings in the Legislative Assembly committee room. I have to say that the overcrowded conditions that we all experienced were not conducive to the smooth running of the estimates committee hearings. Although the management committee endeavoured to allocate the smaller portfolios to that room, which were deemed to need less space, I must advise members that in fact 161 advisers were present throughout the week in Estimates Committee B; that is, only nine fewer than were present in the Legislative Assembly chamber for Estimates Committee A. It is my view that the Legislative Assembly committee room is totally inadequate for the purpose of estimates hearings. I am extremely disappointed that the Legislative Council did not agree to accommodate us in the secondary chamber for that week of estimates hearings. It is particularly galling considering that the Legislative Assembly allocated its chamber to the other place to use while the Legislative Council airconditioning fit-out was completed. Therefore, not only was the room overcrowded but also Reporting Services incurred some $30 000 in costs for outsourcing the recording of Assembly Estimates B daily Hansard during that week. I acknowledge that the proceedings for estimates committees will be given further consideration, both in the physical sense and in the content or presentation on how to get better value out of those budget papers. However, in lieu of any other arrangement, I urge the Leader of the House and the management committee to consider the less than satisfactory conditions experienced by ministers, advisers, members of this house, staff, media and members of the public, with a view to securing the use of the other place for estimates hearings each year, if the committee cannot come up with a better process, as that room was truly unacceptable. Having got that off my chest, I will proceed with some of the statistics. Four off-budget authorities were considered in committee B: the Rottnest Island Authority, the State Housing Commission, the Forest Products Commission and the Electricity Networks Corporation. There have been, therefore, some improvements to the consideration of off-budget authorities and in the times allocated to them. I will quickly refer to some statistics to put them on the record. Industry and Resources, division 4, service 2, and Science and Innovation, division 4, services 5 and 6, took one hour and two minutes, and the opposition asked six questions and the government asked 10; Energy, division 52, the opposition asked 21 questions and the government six. The Energy division included the Electricity Networks Corporation, an off-budget authority; interestingly, they seem to have been combined, as I could not find a timeline. Small Business, division 68, took 32 minutes, and the opposition asked six questions and the government three. That might make an interesting analysis, given the member for Avon’s earlier comments. The South West Development Commission, division 70, took 28 minutes, and the opposition asked six questions and the government five. There was no debate on division 69. Industry and Resources, division 4, services 1 and 4, took two hours and two minutes, and the opposition asked 77 questions and the government five; Consumer and Employment Protection, division 53, took one hour and 20 minutes, the opposition asked 54 questions and the government three; Registrar, WA Industrial Relations Commission, division 54, took 10 minutes, and the opposition asked four questions and the government one; Goldfields- Esperance Development Commission, division 55, took 23 minutes, and the opposition asked 17 questions and the government two. There was no time available to debate the Great Southern Development Commission, division 56; therefore no questions were asked. Fisheries, division 62, took 20 minutes, and the opposition asked 16 questions and the government five. At the Kimberley Development Commission, division 63, session the opposition asked three questions and the government four. The Pilbara Development Commission, division 64, took 38 minutes, and the opposition asked four questions and the government one. The Gascoyne Development Commission, division 65, took one minute, and there were no questions from the opposition and one from the government - somebody therefore got in a quick question. Agriculture and Food, division 14, took two hours and 47 minutes, and the opposition asked 25 questions and the government six. The Agriculture Protection Board of WA, division 15, took 22 minutes, and the opposition asked seven questions and the government one; and the Rural Business Development Corporation, division 16, took three minutes, and the opposition asked two questions and the government one. There was good productivity in that division. The Midwest Development Commission, division 17, took eight minutes, and the opposition asked two questions and the government one. Unfortunately no time was available for the Wheatbelt Development Commission, division 18; therefore, no questions were asked. The Forest Products Commission, an off-budget authority, took 30 minutes, and the opposition asked eight questions and the government five; Local Government and Regional Development, division 61, took one hour and 48 minutes, and the opposition asked 57 questions and the government 23; Housing and Works, division 35, took one hour and 57 minutes, and the opposition asked 28 questions and the government 17. The Heritage Council of WA, division 36, took 35 minutes, and the opposition asked seven questions and the government nine. The National Trust of Australia (WA), division 37, took six minutes, and the opposition asked four questions and the government four; Land Information, division 38, took 17 minutes, and the opposition asked five questions and the government four; the State Housing Commission, an off-budget authority, had an hour allocated but took only 50 minutes, and the opposition asked 17 questions and the government 10; the state’s road safety initiatives, which are covered by the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, division 3, service 8, took 35 minutes, and the opposition asked 17 questions and the government three; the Police Service, division 57, took one hour and 16 minutes, and the opposition asked 32 questions and the
3518 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] government nine; the Fire and Emergency Services Authority of WA, division 58, took eight minutes, during which the opposition asked four questions and the government two; and Corrective Services, division 59, took two hours, and the opposition asked 34 questions and the government 12. There was no time available to debate the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, division 60; therefore, there were no questions asked. On Thursday, Community Development, division 67, services 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, took two hours and 40 minutes, and the opposition asked 74 questions and the government 16; during the Motor Vehicle Registration and Driver Licensing Services, division 39, service 2, hearing the opposition asked three questions and the government four; Indigenous Affairs, division 43, took one hour, and the opposition asked 22 questions and the government eight; Tourism, division 44, took one hour and 10 minutes, and the opposition asked 14 questions and the government 10; Culture and the Arts, division 45, took 20 minutes, and the opposition asked nine questions and the government two; Rottnest Island Authority, the other off-budget item, took 30 minutes, and the opposition asked 10 questions and the government four; the Disability Services Commission, division 66, took one hour and 30 minutes, and the opposition asked 24 questions and the government nine; and during the Community Development Women’s Policy and Progress, division 67, service 4, hearing the opposition asked five questions and the government four. In committee B, 64 requests were made for supplementary information, which is a similar number to those asked in the other committee. The supplementary information has been provided with the exception of one item that is outstanding, but it is expected this week. Once again, I thank the acting chairmen who assisted in committee B. I particularly thank the Acting Speakers who chaired committee B, as it was not without its difficulties. I also thank the members who participated in that room for their cooperation and collaboration during the week. They put up with extreme difficulties during the week in that room, which was very unpleasant and not an easy place in which to do good business. I therefore thank them particularly for their cooperation. Also I especially note my thanks to the staff who helped us to run the committee relatively smoothly in very difficult circumstances. I cannot express my thanks enough for the support we received in committee B. MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta - Leader of the House) [4.00 pm]: I thank the Deputy Speaker and all the members who chaired the estimates committees for their work and for making the committees run so smoothly. I thank the members who contributed to the debate on estimates committees A and B, and to all the members who served on the committees. I also thank the staff, who were absolutely crucial to the smooth functioning of the estimates hearings. It is pleasing to hear the positive comments that members believe that the estimates committees generally worked well. As the Leader of the Opposition indicated, some elements have worked better in previous years. Clearly the opportunity exists to do better, and we will continue to review the estimates committees to see how they can be improved. The biggest problems arose because earlier in the year - as members will be well aware - we had to deal with the resignation of the Premier, the election of a new Premier and a change of ministries. That meant that the programmed arrangement for the estimates hearings in a non- sitting week of both houses - so that one estimates hearing could be held in the Legislative Assembly chamber and one in the Legislative Council chamber - could not be fulfilled. The delay in new ministers taking up portfolios meant that the budget date slipped back a bit. A later budget date caused a lot of problems. Given the positive reports that the estimates committees worked and that they worked well, people obviously tackled those problems. Clearly there were inconveniences, and there are things that we hope to do better next year. I would like to give a guarantee; however, I cannot. However, there will not be a change in Premier next year and we will not have to change our schedule. Mr T. Buswell: Will there be a change of ministers? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I hope not, but we will see. Hopefully, we will be able to arrange to use the Legislative Council’s chamber and in that way we will not run into the difficulty of trying to cram too many people into a small room. Mr C.J. Barnett: Would you give some consideration to having next year, on a trial basis, one estimates committee over two weeks? I urge the government to consider that. I do not think it can ever work; we tried when we were in government and the Labor Party has tried since it has been in government. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I am not sure what the advantages would be if both chambers were available. However, I am happy to take up the member for Cottesloe’s point. Mr C.J. Barnett: I think it should be looked at by the Parliament. I do not think that I or any other member should have to choose on day one between taking part in the estimates debates on water versus electricity. Members of Parliament should be able to choose not to attend the hearings; however, they should not be forced to choose between different portfolio areas. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is part of the reason that in all the years - this is the sixth year I have been involved in the estimates hearings - we have held discussions to determine whether we could change the scheduling to minimise, or totally eradicate, a potential clash for a particular member who has a keen interest in two portfolios
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3519 that are on at the same time in different rooms. We seek to minimise such problems. The member for Cottesloe’s comment is the first complaint I have heard about a clash in the scheduling. Mr C.J. Barnett: It is a matter of principle. I think it should be raised. The way modern Parliaments are going, estimates hearings should be more important than they have been. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: We have extended the coverage. We have sought to go down that road, and on that basis I am happy to have discussions with the member for Cottesloe about how we can improve the estimates hearings and make them even better. Question put and passed. REVENUE LAWS AMENDMENT BILL 2006 Second Reading Resumed from 17 May. MR T. BUSWELL (Vasse - Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [4.06 pm]: Before I commence Mr Acting Speaker (Mr P.B. Watson), I join with the member for Avon in extending my commiserations to you and the other poor unfortunate supporters of the Collingwood Football Club for what transpired yesterday. The ACTING SPEAKER: It is amazing how Melbourne Football Club supporters come out of the woodwork! Mr T. BUSWELL: Although I am not a Melbourne supporter, I understand the grief and loss you feel today. Before I consider the specifics of the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill 2006, I will spend the time available to me stepping back, as it were, and once again having a broader look at the government’s record in a couple of areas. I want to look at the government’s record in taxation collection since the 2001 election. I will consider the performance of the government in delivering tax relief to Western Australians, which was effectively guaranteed under the goods and services tax agreement, and to those taxes that are generally referred to as the GST stamp duties. I will also spend a little time looking at what I call the failed state tax review. I will outline some of the implications of the current state land tax regime, and the failure of this bill to address any of the substantive concerns that many people in the community have about that regime. Finally, I will quickly peruse the bill and touch on some of the elements that the opposition supports and some of the elements that the opposition will seek to change, even though it is highly unlikely that the government will agree to the opposition’s proposed changes. The opposition will support, by and large, the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill 2006. We learnt some time ago from the federal Leader of the Opposition, the member for Brand - the individual commonly referred to as Bomber Beazley and the one for whom the member Rockingham has served some time as an apprentice chauffeur - that oppositions oppose bills that deliver tax cuts to the community, even if they do not necessarily agree with the extent and albeit the tax cuts may be belated and not substantive enough. However, they do so at their peril. I will commence by looking at this government’s tax performance. Once again, I state for the public record the opposition’s view that this government has effectively achieved two milestones in which it should take no pleasure or pride. First, this government is easily regarded as the biggest spending state government in Western Australian history. Secondly, it is easily regarded as the highest taxing state government in Western Australian history. The net result of this approach to fiscal management by the Treasurer and this government is that, first, WA has Australia’s most uncompetitive state-based taxation regime and, second, it has an unfettered growth in recurrent expenditure. This has resulted in, and is increasingly resulting in, the establishment of an underlying structural imbalance in the state’s finances. We have in this state a tax regime that is not business friendly, but is an aspirational inhibitor. I like that term, because the taxation regime in this state places an inhibitor, through stamp duty, on individuals and families who want to get ahead and who want to buy, for example, a bigger house; it places inhibitors on individuals and families who want to invest in property but who face land tax and stamp duty regimes that make it harder for them to achieve that to which they aspire. Indeed, when we look at this government’s performance with tax, as I often do in this house, the $5 billion looms large on the horizon. In the last financial year, the Treasurer was finally able to ratchet up state taxes in Western Australia through the $5 billion threshold. He was finally able to tax Western Australian households and businesses to the extent that, in aggregate, state taxes have increased to more than $5 billion. This year, the Treasurer’s fiscal target is $5.1 billion in tax income. Let us compare that with the tax take for when the government was first elected. It is an increase of $2.2 billion, or 75 per cent. However, we all know that the Treasurer has a habit, reflected time and again in his budgets, of underestimating tax revenue as part of the budgeting process. Our figures indicate that the Treasurer tends to underestimate his budgeted tax income by about 14 per cent. If we factor in that extra 14 per cent, as most analysts surely would, the result is a tax revenue collection of about $5.8 billion, which is an increase since the 2000-01 financial year of $2.9 billion, effectively double the tax take since that time. The Treasurer likes to talk about taxation as a percentage of gross
3520 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] state product. However, for every single man, woman and child in Western Australia, the government collects more than $2 500. When this Treasurer was elected in 2001, it collected a little over $1 500. The sad reality is that Western Australia is now the least competitive of all states in Australia. From an economic perspective, this state is widely regarded as being the basket-case of financial performance. Western Australians are taxed $200 more per person per annum than New South Welshmen, and $800 more per person per annum than Queenslanders. The sad reality is that the record of this government on tax and on spending is that it is big on both. The unfortunate fact is that this bill - as I said earlier, one the opposition will support with conditions - does little, if anything, to address the disastrous tax record of this government in Western Australia. I will take a minute to examine how my four favourite individual components of state tax have risen under this Treasurer’s guidance. I will start with payroll tax, which has increased by $520 million, or 70 per cent, since 2000-01. Land tax has increased from $220 million to $320 million; conveyances and stamp duties on property purchases, from $550 million to $1.8 billion, an increase of some 233 per cent; and, finally, stamp duty on motor vehicles, by $190 million, or 120 per cent, over the same period. Despite the Treasurer from time to time having a fit of enthusiasm and publicly claiming to be the great reformer of state tax, the facts do not support his claims. I often refer to the advertisement the Treasurer ran some time ago in the Sunday Times and perhaps some other august Western Australian journals. Mr E.S. Ripper: Is there another one? Mr T. BUSWELL: According to the Minister for Health’s comments today, he has re-embraced The West Australian. It is now close to the heartbeat of the government and is a journal that, according to the Minister for Health, is now fully apprised of the government’s views and positions. Dr S.C. Thomas: It is quotable. Mr T. BUSWELL: Yes. The West Australian has become eminently quotable. We shall see. I refer again to this wonderful full-page advertisement that appeared in a number of publications. It appeared first in March, and I explained earlier what happened on that exciting day in March when the Premier and Treasurer unveiled to the people of Western Australia the outcome of phase 1 of the state tax review, although the interim report had not been released, of course. The advertisement explained to the people of Western Australia how taxes were being driven down by this government under the guidance and firm hand of the Treasurer. The ad lists 11 taxes that had been, were about to be or were in the process of being abolished. It lists financial institutions duty; stamp duty on listed shares, cheques, unlisted shares, leases, life insurance and workers’ compensation and bank account debits tax. Those are eight taxes this government has indicated will be abolished. It has also indicated that it will reduce stamp duty on mortgages by 50 per cent from July this year and abolish it completely in July 2008. It will abolish also the stamp duty on the hire of goods and - we should not hold our breath - in 2010 stamp duty on real conveyances. I have read this advertisement over and again and the one thing it does not mention - not even in the fine print at the bottom of the page - is that those taxes mentioned were paid for by the goods and services tax that now flows to this state. As I indicated earlier, those taxes were commonly referred to as the GST stamp duties. The government’s committee examined the issue last year and the government will tell us that no commitment was made to abolish taxes; it committed only to review them. That is an argument the Treasurer has made time and again; it is not one that I or other members on this side of the house accept and I doubt whether the vast majority of the Western Australians accept it. Mr E.S. Ripper: It is the truth. Mr T. BUSWELL: If it is the truth, perhaps the Treasurer should have had the courtesy of letting the people of Western Australia know that, although he has cut tax revenues, the government collects that money through the GST, which was the GST deal. Mr C.J. Barnett: Perhaps he should give a note of thanks to Peter Costello. Mr T. BUSWELL: Yes; maybe a thankyou note. Perhaps he could have placed a picture of Peter Costello in the bottom corner of the advertisement. Mr E.S. Ripper: Perhaps Peter Costello should send a note of congratulations to Western Australian businesses for their returns to the federal government. Mr T. BUSWELL: Maybe there should be a picture of both this state Treasurer and the federal Treasurer warmly embracing to celebrate that they both agreed to the federal government’s levying a goods and service tax on the people of Australia on the basis that the states would abolish the GST stamp duties to which I referred earlier. As we all know, Western Australia was the last state to race to embrace the need to abolish these GST stamp duties. The Treasurer was doing only what he had already previously committed to do. It is misleading in the extreme to spend an enormous amount of time dressing up the delayed, staged and phased implementation of these tax measures as wonderful new initiatives. When I perused the state tax review web site, one of my
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3521 favourite web sites, I was interested to read the “Australian Government Submission to the Western Australian State Tax Review”, which I will read into Hansard. In its submission, the Australian government states - The abolition of the IGA stamp duties is consistent with the objectives of the IGA and, further, would be of benefit to Western Australia for a number of reasons, including: • enhancing the competitiveness of Western Australia as the majority of the other States have already committed to abolishing the majority of these taxes; • enhancing efficiency through abolishing taxes with a narrow base which impede economic activity; and • enhancing the simplicity of the tax system. It also refers to the way in which the abolition of intergovernmental agreement of stamp duties will mean the elimination of double taxation etc. It also goes to some length to discuss the failure of the state government to abolish those taxes when it quite clearly should have. In essence, through the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill the government is effectively, on all but one of these taxes, finally delivering, albeit in a tardy fashion, on its commitment made under the GST agreement, on which it has continually reneged, which resulted in Western Australians paying higher levels of tax than they should have. I think it would be correct to say that the Treasurer recently handed down the report on the state tax review with minimal fanfare. That announcement was not as impressive as the one he made with the Premier in March this year when he announced those token tax cuts. This review met with minimal acclamation from the broader business community and the broader community of Western Australia. Why is that the case? It is because this 319-page document fails to deliver any substantive outcomes for advancing tax reform in Western Australia. There are 319 pages and a similar size technical appendix, and it was a year in the making. The state tax reference group beavered away in the background, and who knows how many bureaucrats down at State Treasury worked on the document. The only announcement the Treasurer could make was that he would abolish two more of the stamp duties connected to the GST. No wonder the applause was deafening! No wonder the criticism from a variety of organisations in Western Australia was overwhelming. Nowhere was that more so than among the organisations the Treasurer invited to participate in his state tax reference group. I wonder whether back in March, when the Premier and the Treasurer made that earth shattering announcement about cutting a trifling amount out of state tax revenue, the members of the state tax reference group knew that was going to happen. I suspect they did not. I suspect they were not informed. I suspect it was as much of a surprise to them as it was to everybody else in Western Australia. That highlights the smokescreen the Treasurer is attempting to create around tax reform through the state tax review. I maintain that the Treasurer has no intention of embracing tax reform until it is politically expedient to do so. I think the timing of the state tax review is clearly indicative of that position. I believe the Treasurer’s objective is to continue to use the economic good times in Western Australia to ratchet up the collection of state taxes. I am sure he is targeting at least $6 billion, if not well beyond that, before he gives any serious consideration to state tax reform. We have a document here that is as much about reasons not to cut taxes as it is about reasons to cut taxes. As I said before, it is a very disappointing document - Mr E.S. Ripper: Health, education, law and order, child protection, disability services - they are good reasons. Mr T. BUSWELL: I think in many ways the Treasurer has been caught out. The members of the state tax review, who were the first on the blower to criticise the Treasurer when this document was handed down, know full well what he is about with that review. The only attempt to deliver meaningful tax reform in this bill to keep the boom times rolling is tied up in two tax reforms. It is a pretty poor response to record budget surpluses and record levels of taxation revenue. It is little wonder he has been judged very harshly by the Western Australian business community, groups such as the Property Council of Australia, and those people who must continue to pay record levels of stamp duty when they buy properties. It is little wonder they have drawn that conclusion. It is little wonder that that happened when this rather nice looking document, the state tax review, was handed down, and it is little wonder that the budget was criticised in the way that it was. I would like to refer to some interesting developments that occurred recently that contrast the situation in other states with the state of affairs in WA, and the mind-set of the Western Australian government in regard to tax reform. I refer to the recent announcements in Queensland, the lowest-taxed state, and Victoria, where as a result of the budget process substantive cuts in payroll tax have been announced. This Treasurer and the state tax review have not identified payroll tax as being a priority tax to cut. Yet, in other jurisdictions enjoying far smaller surpluses relative to the total size of their economic activity compared with that in Western Australia, reform in areas such as payroll tax is being embraced. Victoria, for example, announced as part of its budget process that the rate of payroll tax would be lowered to five per cent over the next couple of years. Queensland, which already has the lowest payroll tax of all states, announced a substantive lift in the payroll tax exemption threshold to a million dollars. The Treasurer knows as well as I do that our 5.5 per cent rate at $750 000 is
3522 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] becoming increasingly uncompetitive. He knows as well as I do that payroll tax is important in terms of business tax competitiveness. Yet, in this budget, when the Treasurer had an opportunity to address payroll tax, as he had with some other taxes, he chose to do nothing. I understand that the Treasurer will probably get to his feet in a minute and bleat on excitedly about the concept of “less with less”. For some reason it seems to have tickled his enthusiasm. I wonder why that is so. Why is it that he is a little embarrassed to talk about the expenditure goals that he set when he was first elected in 2001, when he said he would keep the growth in recurrent expenditure at real per capita growth levels? Why does he never talk about that any more? Why will he not refer to those lofty goals? Why did he let state recurrent expenditure blow out by more than eight per cent this year? The answer quite clearly is that he has no interest in reining in the growth in recurrent expenditure. The net result is that he has no interest in delivering meaningful tax reforms. I want to spend a little time talking about land tax. We have discussed this before in the house and it is an item of some significance to me. It is true that in the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill the Treasurer is proposing some modifications to land tax rates. They are at best minor modifications. As one person described it to me, in the totality of the land tax system in Western Australia they are dust in the balance. There are some serious issues with land tax that need to be considered. I was interested to read a letter that accompanied a submission to the state tax review from a company called Burella Pty Ltd, of Applecross. It talks about the impact of the state land tax regime on smaller investors in Western Australia. One of the problems with the perception of land tax is that it is in many ways a substitute for one of the Treasurer’s early misfires, the premium property tax. There is a perception that only the wealthy pay land tax: it is those people with the large commercial property portfolios or the people who own half the industrial area in Karratha. It might be the people with the big expensive holiday house at Yallingup or Eagle Bay in my electorate, but who live in the member for Cottesloe’s electorate. Some would suggest that, but it is not necessarily the case. The facts are that there are many average, hardworking people on average take-home salaries who have chosen for whatever reason to invest in property. Property is a traditional source of investment funds for many people in Australia. Their idea is to own a residential or commercial investment property. It is often those people who suffer the most under this state’s land tax system. It is a fact that fewer people pay land tax as the bottom threshold rises, but the total land tax take increases. I want to read a couple of comments from this submission by Burella Pty Ltd. It highlights the three crucial issues of land tax: the threshold brackets, progressive scales, and aggregation. The submission states that the land tax aggregation principle suffers from the following flaws: it encourages property owners with more than one property to develop artificial ownership structures to avoid the punitive effects of the escalating land tax scales. Although this reduces land tax assessments, it increases administrative, accounting, legal and other costs. Small investors in the residential and industrial property markets find the cost of artificial ownership structures can outweigh land tax savings. Hence the aggregation principle unfairly targets a small group of investors. Namely, the most vulnerable, which are the small investors. Members know that often it is the sophisticated investors who have available to them tools and ownership structures to minimise their exposure to land tax. I will read some interesting figures that detail the dilemma with which these people are faced. The people concerned own five properties. The properties are effectively owned by two families, who have built up their property portfolio over time to fund their retirement. Their land tax bill has increased from $4 200 in 1989-90 to $35 400 in 2004-05. Over 15 years their land tax bill has increased by 740 per cent. This equates to a compounded increase of 15.2 per cent each year for 15 years. In 1989-90, the land tax expense comprised 1.4 per cent of their gross income, yet by 2004-05 it was 8.1 per cent. One of big problems facing people who hold multiple properties and who must deal with aggregation is they cannot pass on all the land tax costs associated with that aggregation to the people who rent those properties. The landowners increasingly find that a larger percentage of their rental income is used to pay land tax. This has a significant negative impact on people who would be termed “average investors”. They are mums and dads; they are family-based investors. I have highlighted this issue previously in the house, and I have provided members with examples of people in my electorate who believe there is a disincentive for them to save and invest because of the state’s land tax regime. I will provide members with an example of an investor who holds a property portfolio worth $2 million. If the investor bought an additional property worth $750 000, the land tax bill on the recently purchased property would be $17 250 because of the nature of aggregation under the state land tax regime. However, if the investor set up another company and bought the same property through the auspices of that company - provided it was the only property owned by that company - the land tax bill would be just $1 980. In other words, the investor would save just over $15 000 by a clever use of property ownership through a company structure to minimise the land tax bill. The sad fact is that the land tax regime must be seriously looked at. The State Tax Review Reference Group mentions that Western Australia’s land tax regime is not the most uncompetitive land tax regime in Australia. I accept that, and nice charts prove the point. However, there is a serious issue of land tax impacting on small to middle-sized investors much more unfairly than it impacts on the higher end of the market.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3523
That must be looked at either through an examination of aggregation - because aggregation is ostensibly at the core of the issue - or the scales of the charges and the thresholds that apply. This issue is having a big impact on people’s preparedness to invest and the rates of return they enjoy from those investments. I will conclude by talking about the detail in the legislation before us. As I have said, the opposition is in a position to offer its support, by and large, for this legislation with a couple of provisos. I commend the Treasurer and his staff who have produced this legislation. There are good initiatives in it that affect a variety of people for a variety of different reasons. An amendment will be made to the Stamp Act and Land Tax Act as part of the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill 2006. The bill will abolish from the Stamp Act the hire of goods duty, effective from January 2007. That is a good outcome, albeit belated. The bill will halve the rate of mortgage duty from 1 July 2006, which, I understand, is why the bill is before Parliament so promptly, and the other half will be abolished by 1 July 2008. Why did the Treasurer not consider the state government providing total relief from that duty effective from 1 July 2006? My understanding is that the government’s decision means it will receive an extra $73 million this year. The bill extends the home owner concession on stamp duty, which currently applies to first home owners, to people entering into shared equity arrangements with the Department of Housing and Works. This is an excellent initiative that we are happy to support. This initiative means that people who cannot afford to purchase the full value of a home and who enter into arrangements with the Department of Housing and Works, whereby equity is transferred to them in two or three parcels over a number of years, can receive the benefit of the first home owner stamp duty concession with the purchase of each of those parcels. Currently that benefit expires following the purchase of the first parcel. The Stamp Act is a fabulous read for anyone who is looking for light entertainment. The bill removes the requirement under section 31B of the Stamp Act for creditors who receive beneficial ownership of a bankrupt’s property to lodge a notification with the state tax office. My understanding is that that will be retrospective. We do not oppose that because it means people who may not have strictly followed the requirements of the act in the past will be exempt from that provision. The bill also changes the liability of a person who pays stamp duty on settlements or gifts from the donor to the donee. The opposition will support that measure for a number of reasons. Amendments are to be made to the Land Tax Act and the Land Tax Assessment Act. As I said earlier, a new land tax scale will be introduced for 2006-07. The opposition has some issues with the nature of the land tax scale in this state, and I have already detailed the reasons for that. We feel very strongly that although the interim report of the state tax review identifies those issues via submissions, it does almost nothing to deliver meaningful reform in that area. The bill also extends the current one-year land exemption for building new homes to two years. Albeit that is slightly difficult to understand after reading the flow charts, the opposition will support it. The opposition supports also the extension of the primary residence exemption that currently applies for a trust property used by a disabled beneficiary to a property owned by a parent, grandparent or sibling. We support the related changes to the Rates and Charges (Rebates and Deferments) Act that carries that provision into that act, so that those people will also qualify for concessions for local government rates, water rates and the emergency services levy. The final matter is the anti-avoidance provision, which targets landowners who supposedly contrive to hold land with a minority shareholder or a minority interest party. It was put to us that that is occurring in only a very small percentage of cases of ownership to avoid the aggregation requirements of the act. We have some issues and must ask questions of the Treasurer’s advisers on this matter during the consideration in detail stage because there are a number of unanswered questions. Some ambiguity must be clarified. The budget papers that accompany the legislation indicate there will be a $10 million increase in land tax because of this measure. I would like to know whether any consultation on this matter has taken place between the Treasurer and the Property Council of Australia or other representatives of the property industry. I am very interested to know what feedback they gave during that consultation. It seems that this is one of those cases of a government attempting to deal with the symptom rather than the problem. The problem quite clearly is the nature and impact of aggregation on property holders. The extent to which this minor interest provision will solve problems is dubious, especially when, if it is tax-friendly for capital gains tax and other purposes, people can hold properties in different corporate structures. I am not one who believes that a plug can be put in a hole when an anti- avoidance provision is identified. The problem is much more complicated. The capacity of people to use such tax avoidance provisions is much more sophisticated than this legislation gives credit. That, by way of summary, is our position on the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill. Our concern is that this is merely a dressing up of the Treasurer’s obligations under the intergovernmental agreement and the removal of goods and services tax duties. We are pleased that the Treasurer is finally moving towards doing that, but we are still concerned that his high-taxing, big-spending government fails to embrace the need for control and
3524 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] management of recurrent expenditure growth in Western Australia. Until the Treasurer does that and the government acknowledges the need to control the growth in recurrent expenditure, this government will struggle to deliver sustainable, meaningful tax relief and taxation reform to the business and private communities of Western Australia. MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe) [4.52 pm]: I have been listening attentively to the comments made by the member for Vasse. Why do members laugh! He has indicated that the opposition supports the bill. I guess I have made the reform of land tax a bit of a cause in recent times. I will not repeat what I have said. However, land tax of all taxes does stand out, principally for two reasons. First, it is a tax on wealth. Most other taxes occur at a point of transaction, whether it be buying a property, receiving an income or buying a consumer good. To some extent there is an element of choice involved when a tax becomes due when a transaction takes place. In the case of land tax that is not true. It is a tax on wealth. Although it will always have anomalies, they become particularly pronounced during a period of rapidly rising property values. On previous occasions when I have spoken on land tax I have raised the issue of changes to the principal place of residence exemption. I acknowledge that this government has made changes to make it fairer. I also raised the issue earlier this year of three of my constituents who were in different situations. One in Mosman Park had knocked over his old house and was planning to build a new one. Because of construction delays and some dispute about the building contract, two years later all he has as his principal place of residence is an empty block of land with no residence on it. However, he finds himself paying land tax. I would be interested in the Treasurer’s comments. There has been change here, which I hope will provide some benefit for people caught in that situation, but I will have to look at the wording. Mr E.S. Ripper: The intention is that if the matter has gone for more than two years, there could be an issue. We might get some advice from the advisers on that particular matter. Mr C.J. BARNETT: If it has gone more than two years, I think that even my constituent would accept that he would be paying one year’s land tax, even though I think it is essentially unfair. Two years seems to be a reasonable period. His two years go back in time. It is not retrospective and he is still in that situation, but my hope would be that he would get at least two years’ credit. The second issue I raised was the case of what I called the Bonnie Doon factor. People do have holiday homes that they enjoy. Many of my constituents, for example, have holiday houses and fishing shacks in the south of the state that they have enjoyed for years and that have suddenly become very valuable properties. What they thought of as their retirement nest eggs and their holiday homes that they, their children and grandchildren could enjoy have suddenly become very difficult to hold onto because of the impact of land tax. I still hope that some consideration will be given to allowing people in genuine circumstances, such as genuine retirees, to defer at least part of the land tax to their estate or until the time a transaction occurs. I know that would be administratively difficult, but I believe it would be fair. The third case, to which the member for Vasse referred, is when people in good faith have provided for their retirement by investing in property. Bear in mind that the sorts of choices available with superannuation today were not available for people whose working life goes back 40, 50 or 60 years. Typically, small business people or professional people may have acquired a portfolio of property assets. To some extent, as a society we tend to say how greedy that is, but what is the difference between having a portfolio of real property as distinct from shares, superannuation or an insurance policy of some form? We need to be conscious that we should not unfairly discriminate against people in those circumstances. It is difficult to deal with, but it is creating a great deal of hardship for many people in the community. I hope that the ultimate direction of the reform of land tax will be to a single, flat, lower rate, because I believe that until that is achieved, we will continue to have these problems. We need to give further consideration to genuine retirees and allow them to defer all or part of their land tax until such time as their property is sold or it is passed on through an estate. I do not think the revenue cost would be much, but it would allow people to have some security, particularly in the case of holiday homes. Why not? One of the Australian ideals is that people can aspire to have a house and even a holiday house. I see nothing wrong with that at all. MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont - Treasurer) [4.58 pm]: I thank members of the opposition for their support of this legislation. The legislation delivers tax cuts to the people of Western Australia. It delivers a 50 per cent cut in mortgage duty from 1 July of this year and the complete abolition of mortgage duty two years later. It delivers the abolition of rental duty from 1 January 2007. It delivers changes to land tax thresholds and scales to ameliorate the impact of large increases in property values on people’s land tax obligations. As the member for Vasse indicated, smaller measures also included in the legislation address injustices and inequities in the taxation system without incurring significant losses of revenue for the services that the community expects from the government. The speech of the member for Vasse was his usual speech about tax relief and tax cuts. I do not want to give my usual response at its usual length, but I will say this: I have been cutting taxes with my government colleagues since May 2004. We have provided for $700 million worth of tax relief in this forthcoming financial year as a
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3525 result of those four rounds of tax cuts, and $3.3 billion of tax relief over the forward estimates has been implemented as a result of those four rounds of tax cuts. I support further tax cuts for Western Australia, provided that the state has the sustainable capacity to offer those tax cuts. When the government comes to make its judgment about whether it has that sustainable capacity, it will look at the following factors. First, the government will have to look at economic circumstances and the likely ongoing strength of the economy. Secondly, the government will have to examine other calls on that financial capacity, which it has. Those other calls are services and service improvements, public sector wage outcomes, infrastructure and the costs of infrastructure. In a sense, there is a four-way trade-off - tax relief, services, wages and infrastructure. To the extent that more financial capacity is allocated to one of those areas, less financial capacity can be allocated to the other three. The government does measure the tax competitiveness of Western Australia against other jurisdictions. Because there are so many differences in the taxation regimes of the states, it is necessary to use a global measure to make that judgment. The global measure that the government uses is the share of the state’s economy going to state taxation. Mr T. Buswell: When did you start to use that? Mr E.S. RIPPER: On that measure, the state is competitive because the share of Western Australia’s economy going to taxation is less than the average share in other states. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition raises a question about this measure. It is the measure that was used by Richard Court’s coalition government. It is also the measure used by Peter Costello’s government; it is actually John Howard’s government, although Peter Costello would like it to be his government. It is the measure used by Peter Costello. It is an internationally accepted measure for comparing taxation efforts in various jurisdictions. Mr T. Buswell: Treasurer, why didn’t you adopt that measure in 2001? Mr E.S. RIPPER: We did adopt a different measure for a four-year period. We broke with Richard Court’s measure and adopted a taxation per capita measure in our first term. We have returned to the measure used by Richard Court and to the measure used by the federal government in comparing its taxation effort with taxation efforts in other countries. One of the reasons for doing that is that there is a perverse relationship between the state’s economic performance and the state’s apparent performance on a taxation per capita measure. In other words, a very strong economic performance produces higher taxation per capita and an apparently lower performance in taxation competitiveness, whereas a poor economic performance produces lower taxation per capita and an apparently strong performance in tax competitiveness. To me that does not seem to achieve the objective of tax competitiveness for good economic performance and good social outcomes. What is the point of a measure of tax competitiveness that simply reflects poor economic performance? It is always worth noting that state taxation accounts for only 31 per cent of the state’s revenue, and 41 per cent of the state’s revenue comes from commonwealth grants, including the GST grants. There is a very nasty Grants Commission impact on our share of those commonwealth grants. As our state’s economic performance outshines the economic performance of other states, the Grants Commission makes an assessment that our revenue-raising capacity has increased. It does not matter whether our revenue raising has increased; the assessment that the Grants Commission makes is of our revenue-raising capacity. If the Grants Commission makes the judgment that our revenue-raising capacity, regardless of our actual measures, has increased, it reduces our share of commonwealth grants. The impact of this effect across the forward estimates is very strong. By 2009-10, on current economic forecasts, we would expect to lose up to $700 million in our share of commonwealth GST grants. In other words, the Grants Commission is assuming that because of our economic performance, we should be raising more tax per capita and, on that basis, it is reducing our share of commonwealth grants. In other words, we have a virtual invitation from a federal government body to raise more tax per capita to make up for the commonwealth grants that it will take from us anyway, on the assumption that we have that additional revenue-raising capacity and we will use some or all of it. We do believe in offering further tax cuts. We will make a judgment on the size of those tax cuts when we look at the expenditure required on services, wages and infrastructure. We will make the judgment in the context of our view of the sustainability of our economic performance. The state tax review is a very worthwhile exercise. The government is committed to stage two of the state tax review. The state tax review process will provide us with priorities for tax relief, to which the government can add its judgment of capacity when determining what measures should be adopted in subsequent budgets. I noted that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was not prepared to indicate his priorities for tax relief. Choices have to be made. Should the available capacity be devoted to payroll tax relief, should the available capacity be devoted to relief of stamp duties on property, insurance or motor vehicles, or should there be some allocation to payroll tax and some allocation to stamp duties? What about the relative priority between tax relief for stamp duties on property, motor vehicles or insurance? While the opposition might have the luxury of not being required to state its preferences, in the end the government has to make decisions. A dollar that is devoted to payroll tax relief is a dollar that is not available for stamp duty relief. A dollar that is devoted to stamp duty
3526 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] relief on property conveyances is a dollar that is not available for stamp duty relief on motor vehicles or insurance. The “State Tax Review Interim Report” has suggested that the priority for tax relief should be stamp duties first, payroll tax second, and land tax third. I expect a vigorous debate as we go through the process of consultation on that interim report. I expect that there will be some debate for the rest of this year between various sections of the business community as to whether the priority should be payroll tax relief or stamp duty relief. I will await the outcome of that debate with considerable interest. In the end, the government will be required to make choices on these matters. It will be interesting to see whether the opposition is prepared to make choices, or whether it will continue to want to have its cake and eat it too. There is a very direct trade-off between tax cuts, service improvements, public sector wages outcomes and infrastructure. I draw attention in particular to the trade-off between public sector wages outcomes and tax relief. The government believes in realistic and fair public sector wages outcomes. We do not believe that public sector wages should lag behind those in the private sector. Neither do we believe that public sector wages outcomes should leap ahead of those in the private sector. In the past, the government has been under pressure from public sector unions to provide more generous public sector wage settlements than those rules would indicate. The opposition has been inclined to opportunistically exploit those media debates that have occurred during public sector wage negotiations. If the opposition is genuine in its support for tax relief, the opposition must provide support to the government when unrealistic wage demands are put to us. If the business community really wants to see tax relief, the business community must provide support to the government when unrealistic wage demands are put to us. I believe in fair wage outcomes. I believe in realistic wage outcomes. We are not trying to deny wage justice to public sector workers. However, we do note that on occasion we are asked to provide much more generous settlements to public sector workers than are available on average in the private sector. It is not our policy to do so, and those supporters of tax relief should be prepared to enter the debate in support of the government when it is asked to go beyond its policy on public sector wage matters. Mr T. Buswell: What is your policy, Treasurer? Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have outlined the policy. Mr T. Buswell: Can you explain it again? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition was not really listening. I suggest that he read Hansard. He will see that I have outlined the policy. Mr T. Buswell interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: This legislation is good legislation for the people of Western Australia. When taken into aggregation with the three previous rounds of tax cuts, it delivers tax cuts amounting to $700 million in this forthcoming financial year and $3.3 billion across the forward estimates. I commend the legislation to the house. Question put and passed. Bill read a second time. Consideration in Detail Clause 1 put and passed. Clause 2: Commencement - Mr T. BUSWELL: My question is quite simple and is to put on the public record the Treasurer’s response to the element of retrospectivity contained in the commencement detail of the bill, which states - (2) Section 4 is deemed to have come into operation on 1 January 2004. (3) Sections 5(2) and 6 are deemed to have come into operation on 1 July 2004. I am moderately sure that I have a handle on that, but being a member of the opposition, and never one to look favourably on retrospective legislation, I thought a formal explanation for the public record was warranted. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Clause 2(2), which amends section 4 of the Revenue Laws Amendment Act, relates to the acquisition of beneficial ownership of property of a bankrupt under section 58 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 of the commonwealth. The clause will remedy a defect which came into the legislation as a result of a previous set of amendments and meant that stamp duty might have been payable on property shifted to a bankruptcy trustee. It seemed to me that if that were to occur, it would add insult to injury. The proposal is to remedy this defect that crept into the legislation as a result of amendments made a couple of years ago, by making the amendment retrospective to 1 January 2004. The proposed amendment has been made retrospective to 1 January 2004 to remove the liability of any taxpayer who may have inadvertently become liable to lodge a statement and pay
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3527 duty as a result of amendments to section 31B that came into effect from that date. It should be noted, however, that this deficiency in the legislation has been identified by staff within the Office of State Revenue and has not been raised by any taxpayer. To date no statements under section 31B have been lodged for any such acquisition. Clause 5(2), which amends section 75AG(9), relates to the interaction of the first home owner grant and stamp duty exemptions for first home buyers. The retrospectivity of this amendment seeks to place home buyers who have had to repay their first home owner grant under section 21 of the First Homeowner Grant Act in the same position with regard to stamp duty as those who have had to repay their first home owner grant under section 51 of the First Homeowner Grant Act. The post-grant residency requirements of the First Homeowner Grant Act are that the recipient of a first home owner grant has 12 months to take up residence in the property and must then reside in the property for six months. This period of up to 18 months has meant that compliance dates for some home buyers who have received first home owner grants and first home owner stamp duty relief since 1 July 2004 have only recently commenced. Few cases have been identified for which a grant has had to be repaid under section 21 of the First Homeowner Grant Act. Since this deficiency in the stamp duty legislation has been identified, matters in which a first home owner grant has had to be repaid under section 21 of the First Homeowner Grant Act have been held pending passage of this legislation. The statement with regard to clause 6 is that current section 75AG of the Stamp Act 1921, which operates to provide relief to home buyers who are in receipt of a first home owner grant under the First Home Owner Grant Act 2000, applies only to instruments executed on or after 1 July 2004. Prior to 1 July 2004, the relief provided to first home owners by section 75AG of the Stamp Act is restricted to a maximum of $500. Making this amendment retrospective to 1 July 2004 will ensure that shared equity purchasers who made their initial purchase on or after 1 July 2004, and who have since made a further purchase, are eligible to apply to have the instrument affecting the further purchase reassessed under this section. Such purchasers will have 12 months from the date that royal assent is given to this provision to apply for a reassessment. The State Housing Commission has indicated that only one or two purchasers who made their initial purchase after 1 July 2004 have since purchased further equity in their homes. Clause put and passed. Clause 3 put and passed. Clause 4: Section 31B amended - Mr T. BUSWELL: I am pretty sure that I heard the Treasurer say that, in terms of this requirement, nobody has effectively been picked up to make a statement to the commissioner under section 31B of the Stamp Act. Mr E.S. Ripper: That is right. Mr T. BUSWELL: The point I am trying to make is that no-one has been picked up, so it does not apply to anybody at this stage. It applies to the unwashed, if, indeed, the unwashed were ever picked up. Does the Treasurer follow what I am saying? Mr E.S. Ripper: As we are currently aware, it will not change anyone’s situation. However, it is important to tidy up the legislation should a case emerge that is covered by the period in which there is a deficiency in the legislation. Mr T. BUSWELL: After the lodgement of a statement, does it therefore follow that the duty was payable, or would the commissioner have made a determination based on the receipt of the statement? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The liability to pay stamp duty arises on the transaction. The way our stamp duty legislation works is that there has to be a document that, in principle, must be stamped, although I do not think we affix stamps any more. Mr T. Buswell: It could be a virtual stamp. Mr E.S. RIPPER: We are not quite at that stage yet. When there is a transaction but no document for the purposes of stamping, a statement must be produced. This provision will remove the need for the statement and it will remove the need for the stamp duty to be paid on this type of transaction. I have a set of stamp duty stamps in my office that are obsolete. Mr T. Buswell: Unlike yourself, Treasurer. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I warn the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that I do not intend to be obsolete for some time yet. Clause put and passed. Clause 5 put and passed. Clause 6: Section 75AH inserted - Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr E.S. Ripper (Treasurer).
3528 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED FUND) BILL (NO. 1) 2006 Third Reading Bill read a third time, on motion by Mr E.S. Ripper (Treasurer), and transmitted to the Council.
APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED FUND) BILL (NO. 2) 2006 Third Reading MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont - Treasurer) [5.18 pm]: I move - That the bill be now read a third time. DR E. CONSTABLE (Churchlands) [5.19 pm]: I want to draw members’ attention to some information that was revealed during questioning in two divisions of the estimates hearings. I refer to information that relates to the care of vulnerable children in the community by adults. The first part of this information relates to an area about which questions have been asked on a number of occasions during previous estimates committees. Indeed, attention has been drawn to this issue on many occasions in this house. A question was asked, as it has been asked during previous estimates hearings, about the number of incidents of abuse of children while in the care of the state. In fact, I asked the question. I asked how many children in care were abused in 2005-06. Once again, the answer was quite staggering. There have been 159 reports or allegations of abuse of children in care. That is 159 vulnerable children who have reported, or who have had someone report on their behalf, that they have been physically, emotionally and sexually abused or neglected. So far this year, 17 substantiations of abuse have been made: one of physical abuse, seven of sexual abuse, six of emotional abuse and three of neglect. Some of us have sounded like a broken record every time we have said that one case of abuse of a child in care is one case too many. It is absolutely staggering that 159 allegations have been made of abuse of children in care. I have heard answers like this year after year, but this time I felt as though I had been punched in the guts. I felt absolutely winded by these figures because they show that nothing has been done to improve the situation for children in care. It is really important that the house understand that we have a major problem on our hands and that no headway has been made whatsoever to improve this situation. A second issue I raised, because it was seen as an emerging issue, was the abuse of elderly people in this community. This is a growing problem worldwide. A major United Nations initiative has been established concerning elder abuse. A lot of money is being spent on research in this area and on trying to understand it. Given that it was referred to in a dot point as an emerging issue, I asked how many cases had been reported. The answer was that in the 2005-06 financial year, between 530 and 550 cases of elder abuse had been alleged. That is absolutely staggering; it is about 10 a week. The officer who provided the information went on to say that, in addition, according to Advocare - I am not sure what Advocare is except that it is an organisation funded by the Department of Health - which keeps the statistics, about 600 calls had been made. That amounts to more than 1 000 cases of elder abuse, and I suspect that this is only the tip of the iceberg. It was considered in the budget papers to be an emerging issue. However, it is not emerging; it has emerged in this community and it is a huge issue. It is really important that we all understand that it is happening and that we must do everything we possibly can to minimise it and make sure that it does not happen in our community. The major type of elder abuse is financial abuse, followed by emotional abuse. For example, grandma or an elderly mother might own her home, and children or relatives might do all they can to get access to the house. They might sell it from under her and place her in a situation that is not as comfortable as her own home. Relatives quite often want to get their hands on money or property. I suspect that the problem exists primarily in families or extended families, but it might arise in other situations. Mr Acting Speaker, I thought we were allowed to speak for 15 minutes, not 30 minutes. The ACTING SPEAKER: I was going to advise that we are dealing with the Appropriation (Consolidated Fund) Bill (No. 2), which is the capital works bill. I have given the member some leeway and I will give her a small amount more. Dr E. CONSTABLE: I need a little more leeway before my voice runs out, after which there will be time left over. Mr T. Buswell: It is human capital. Dr E. CONSTABLE: Thank you, member for Vasse; it is exactly that. The ACTING SPEAKER: I am in a benevolent mood tonight, so the member for Churchlands has been given some slack. However, I draw her attention to the need to finish before too long. Dr E. CONSTABLE: I thank the member for Vasse for his assistance; this is about human capital. I have one more element of human capital to mention that will be of great interest to the newly appointed Minister for
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3529
Disability Services. The three areas of abuse to which I am referring are a package, the last of which is of great importance; that is, abuse of disabled people in care. I have a table here of supplementary information that I understand I can quote from directly. It refers to the number of incidents of abuse of people with disabilities in care and the types of abuse. In 2002-03, 44 cases were reported; the following year, 69; the year after that, 97; and so far, to the end of May this year, 105 cases of abuse in care have been reported. A note on the information I received to date reads - the Commission has no capacity to investigate those incidents and allegations from non government agencies. I am not sure whether this information includes only people in the care of government agencies or whether it includes those in the care of both government and non-government agencies. The paper contains further information. So far this year the following incidents have been reported: assault, including sexual, of a person with a disability, 45; ill treatment or wilful neglect of a person with a disability, one; neglect that resulted in or is likely to result in significant physical or psychological harm, 11; significant physical or psychological harm to a person with a disability, 48. They total 105 incidents. The total number of incidents of abuse of elders, abuse of children in care and abuse of people with disabilities is very large. Some of them are in the care of the state and others in the care of their families. This is a problem of major proportions, one that I beg the ministers concerned to do something about. Every year for the past four or five years I have heard the same answers about children who are abused while in the care of the state. Those children were already vulnerable before being placed in care and have been abused yet again. Many of them have been removed from their families because of their abuse and have been placed in care and abused again. How can we tolerate this year after year? The answers we hear quote figures that make it sound as though after a while we accept that this abuse will happen. We should not accept this for one single moment. If the two newly appointed ministers do nothing else as ministers other than address this issue, they will have made a major contribution in their areas. I am very pleased that they are both sitting here while I talk about human capital. When I ask the questions next year in the estimates committee, I ask those ministers to please give me a better answer than I received this year. The ACTING SPEAKER: I remind members that we are dealing with the capital works aspect of the appropriation bills. MS S.E. WALKER (Nedlands) [5.27 pm]: Following on from the member for Churchlands’ comments about human capital, I note that I received a very short response to my questions concerning the emotional abuse of children. I will read it out because “substantiated emotional abuse” is a new title for recording. Six cases of substantiated emotional abuse were revealed during the budget estimates hearings. Three cases included more than one child. Over a period of months, a nine-year-old boy disclosed concerns about the treatment of himself, his eight-year-old bother and his four-year-old sister in the care of a registered departmental carer. He was removed from the placement the same day and his siblings were removed two months later after further assessment. His disclosures and concerns raised by case managers and other professionals over a period of three years - three years - included inappropriate punishment; differential treatment of the children; failure to attend to the children’s medical needs; unrealistic expectations of the nine-year-old, who was diagnosed with cerebral palsy; verbal abuse of the children; and emotional abuse. The carer is currently under review and has no children in her care. All three children are now in alternative placement. I hope they are together. Scenarios 4 and 5 record substantiated emotional abuse by a mother. A three-year-old boy and his six-year-old sister were returned to the care of their mother after she had made considerable progress addressing issues related to substance abuse. During a regular visit by a departmental officer, the mother made a number of very negative comments about the six-year-old’s behaviour and disclosed that she had used a belt to discipline the child twice when she would not do as she was told. The mother had asked the school to provide psychological services for her six-year-old daughter. The department assessed that the behaviour of the children was age appropriate. Emotional abuse was substantiated on the basis of the deterioration of the mother’s mental health and the impact this was having on the treatment of the children. The children were removed from the mother’s care. The sixth scenario involved substantiated emotional abuse by a registered relative carer, an uncle. A 10-year-old male disclosed to his respite carer that his uncle had used threatening and intimidating behaviour towards him, including threatening him with a Samurai sword and nunchakus and pushing him in the chest with a skateboard. The supplementary information states - He also disclosed that his Uncle swore continually at him and would ventilate his anger against the Department in front of himself and his 8 year old sister. As this was the third allegation of a similar nature over a 2 month period both children were removed from the placement the following day. The
3530 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
department assessed that the “cumulative emotional effect of being intimidated with threats of violence as discipline on this already abused child is greater and makes the placement untenable”. I would like to thank the minister for providing that information, although I have to say that in the budget estimates committee proceedings he was pretty hopeless across all his portfolios. I can only support the member for Churchlands’ comments and sincerely hope we get an improvement next year in budget estimates. Question put and passed. Bill read a third time and transmitted to the Council.
OUTCOMES-BASED EDUCATION - PREMIER’S ANSWER TO QUESTION WITHOUT NOTICE Standing Orders Suspension MR P.D. OMODEI (Warren-Blackwood - Leader of the Opposition) [5.30 pm] - without notice: I move - That so much of standing orders be suspended as is necessary to allow the Premier to make an explanation to the Parliament as to the content of his answer to my question on outcomes-based education. During question time I asked the Premier a question relating to outcomes-based education; I asked whether he would guarantee to teachers that the options would remain open. My question stated - I refer to the numerous assertions of both the Minister for Education and Training and the Premier that they would not be changing their implementation plan for outcomes-based education. (1) Does the Premier concede that because of his obstinate support for the Minister for Education and the Premier’s OBE plan in the past, his recent concession on the need for change has damaged his own credibility and leadership? (2) Why has it taken the Premier until now to realise there is a problem with his OBE plan, and will he concede that the belated changes he is now negotiating have the potential to confuse teachers even further? (3) Will the Premier take this opportunity to pledge to Western Australia’s teachers that he will leave the door open for the implementation of OBE to be delayed if they are still not ready following these changes; and, if not, why not? The Premier in his answer said that he had had a meeting with a number of members on his side; namely, the members for Central Kimberley-Pilbara, Bassendean and Wanneroo. They are all members of the Standing Committee on Education and Health. I understand that the committee is considering terms of reference in relation to OBE. I want the Premier to explain his answer to the house and the house to decide whether there has been a breach of standing orders and whether the meeting that took place compromised the independence of the standing committee, given that standing orders are very plain that committee deliberations are not to be discussed outside that forum. This is a very serious matter. It would be open to argue that given that the Premier has had a meeting with three members of the committee, he has not only breached standing orders, but also has compromised the committee, its deliberations and the recommendations it may make to this Parliament. Given that those committee members are discussing confidential matters, I presume, with the Department of Education and Training and the Curriculum Council, and gathering information from wide sources - Mr A.D. McRae: At open hearings. Mr P.D. OMODEI: I am not aware whether the committee’s hearings are open or in camera. The fact is that the committee is deliberating on a decision to make a recommendation and report to this house about outcomes- based education. It is my contention that the Premier’s meeting with those three members has compromised the committee’s deliberations and the Premier may well be in breach of standing orders of the committee system. I ask that the Premier come into the chamber and explain his answer. This is a simple motion calling for standing orders to be suspended to allow him to explain the content of his answer to my question. He should explain to the house what discussion took place with those three members of the committee. I think it is a fair question and members opposite should agree to the suspension. MR T.G. STEPHENS (Central Kimberley-Pilbara) [5.35 pm]: Mr Speaker - Point of Order Mr C.J. BARNETT: I do not dispute the member being given the call, but I thought it was normal for a member to be given the opportunity to second the motion.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3531
The SPEAKER: There is now no requirement for a seconder in our standing orders. Debate Resumed Mr T.G. STEPHENS: There is no reason for the house to accept the Leader of the Opposition’s motion for the suspension of standing orders. There has been no breach of the standing orders of this place and members opposite know it. I can assure them that no such breach occurred. Mr P.D. Omodei: How do I know? Mr T.G. STEPHENS: Because I was there. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that no breach of standing orders of this Parliament occurred. I happen to be a strong upholder of the rights of Parliament and of the need to defend the standing orders and processes and procedures of this place. I can also tell him that the meeting with the Premier took place because I requested it. I can also tell the house that not a single issue that was covered by the processes or privileges of that committee was dealt with. Mr P.D. Omodei: Tell it to the marines! Mr T.G. STEPHENS: I can tell members exactly what I talked about. This is what I asked of the Premier and his minister. As members of Parliament, we are subject to, and the recipients of, large amounts of representation about the government’s perceived failure to engage in the public debate about, and discussions of those who have a grievance with, the processes that are unfolding. In my role as an MP, I asked the Premier and the minister that they engage with the public in the discussion and resolution of this issue. End of discussion, so far as I am concerned. The allegation has just been put to me by The West Australian that somehow or other members of the committee walked into the Premier’s office and foreshadowed for the Premier and the minister the draft report, the blueprint of the way forward. If we had done such a thing, we would deserve the opprobrium of the house. It would be a contempt of the Parliament. Members opposite could hang, draw and quarter us. Mr C.J. Barnett: That is what we are doing. Mr T.G. STEPHENS: Members could lock us up in the dungeons. They could do what they liked with us. The truth is we did no such thing. Several members interjected. Mr T.G. STEPHENS: Do members see the motto underneath the crest up there? They should read it carefully. That motto applies to members opposite. There was nothing wrong with a group of parliamentarians - can I make this additional point: did it include all the Labor members of that committee? No, it did not. Mr C.J. Barnett: Let us find out. Mr T.G. STEPHENS: A group of parliamentarians came together, all of whom are members of that committee, but it was not all the members of the committee. Several members interjected. Mr T.G. STEPHENS: I can assure members that I have operated in a house in which I have never had the numbers to protect myself against a breach of parliamentary privilege. In that place I always knew of the requirements of parliamentary privilege. Now that I am in another house in which I can be protected by the majority that constitutes the house, I do not need that protection. I have done nothing wrong. No member of this house who attended that meeting has done anything wrong. Mr P.D. Omodei: Is it not strange that they were all members of that committee? Mr T.G. STEPHENS: Honi soit qui mal y pense. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I bring the member back to the motion. Although some leeway is allowed, the member should talk to the motion before the house. Mr T.G. STEPHENS: The motion before the house is that standing orders should be suspended to provide the Premier with an opportunity to explain the meeting. I convened the meeting. I asked - Mr C.J. Barnett: You convened it? In what capacity? Mr T.G. STEPHENS: As an MP. Mr C.J. Barnett: As an MP? Who did you invite to the meeting? Mr T.G. STEPHENS: I asked the Premier whether he would attend the meeting. Mr C.J. Barnett: Who else? Mr T.G. STEPHENS: Allow me to -
3532 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Several members interjected. Mr T.G. STEPHENS: I took the opportunity of absolutely making it clear - Mr M.P. Whitely: I was there. Mr C.J. Barnett: The member for Bassendean said that he was there. The member for Wanneroo was there. Are you all members of the committee? Yes! Mr T.G. STEPHENS: Have we done anything wrong? No, we have not. MR M.W. TRENORDEN (Avon) [5.40 pm]: Rarely does a case come before the house whereby a chairman of a committee has stood before us and admitted his guilt. Several government members interjected. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Members opposite can yell at me all they like. Mr J.N. Hyde: You have given the same speech twice to two different chairmen. THE SPEAKER: Order, member for Perth! Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: The member for Perth breached the rules some months ago. Mr J.N. Hyde: You were wrong then and you are wrong now. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: No, I was not wrong then. Let us talk about what the chairman just said. The first thing he said when he stood up was, “I was there.” Mr J.B. D’Orazio: Bully for you! Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Let us go through the process. He explained the process of the meeting. He actually said, “I called the Premier and I asked the Premier to come and see three members of the committee who are not opposition members.” The member for Perth was not there. It does not matter whether it is just one member of the committee. The breach stands with one member, let alone two or three members. This committee, as we have already heard, is meant to report on 29 June this year. That is days away. What is it reporting on? It is something to do with outcomes-based education, which just happens to be a bit of a hot subject at the moment. The chairman asked the Premier to attend a meeting. Those of us who have been on a committee for even five minutes know that if the Premier wanted to attend the committee, he should have approached the committee and requested to meet with it. All members should have been requested to attend the meeting. The meeting could have been held behind closed doors. That is the process. I do not know for sure whether the committee’s report is in draft form, but from my experience in all the years that I have sat on a committee, I assume that the report is in a draft form. There is no question about that. That is the procedure. As far as this house is concerned, the draft report is to be delivered to this house on 29 June. The chairman has taken the privilege and confidential actions of that committee and has denigrated each member of the committee, including the member for Perth, who was not there - Mr T.G. Stephens: Wrong. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: The member for Central Kimberley-Pilbara said that he called the meeting. Mr T.G. Stephens: I am an MP. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: The member is also the chairman of the committee that is reporting on OBE. Somebody can tell me exactly what it is reporting on. Mr J.N. Hyde: He is the most senior MP in the Parliament. Mr T.G. Stephens: I am the father of the Parliament! Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: No, the member is not. Mr T.G. Stephens: Nearly. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Nearly. It is not a question about whether we debate this. There is an admitted breach of privilege. The chairman has admitted it. That puts us in a very important - Point of Order Mr T.G. STEPHENS: The father of the house would surely know that it is a breach of the standing orders to allege that there has been such a breach without having moved a motion to that effect. The member has not moved that motion. He should not make those allegations. The SPEAKER: The member for Avon indicated that he thought there was a breach. That is not the same as saying that there has been a breach. I do not think he has contravened the rules, other than he should really be talking about the suspension of standing orders.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3533
Debate Resumed Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: That is just what I was about to do. Since the Leader of the House moved this motion, the motion has moved on. Mr J.C. Kobelke: I have not moved any motion. Don’t defame me. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Okay. I meant the Leader of the Opposition. Do not get smart. Mr T.G. Stephens: You don’t know who the Leader of the Opposition is. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I would be worried about my position if I were the member. The Leader of the Opposition asked a reasonable question about an answer to a question during question time. During question time the Premier thanked some members. I listened to that answer with some interest. My point is that since then the chairman of the committee has spoken and the substance of the motion has moved on from the position at which it started when the Leader of the Opposition moved it to a situation whereby there has been an admission of a significant breach of process. A meeting was held at which the Premier met with three members of the opposition. He met with a range of other public people on an issue that is before the committee. Several government members interjected. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I meant that the Premier met with three members of the government. I am just excited about this. These types of things rarely happen. The process must be developed. It is a pity that the Premier is not in the chamber. I am sure that the Speaker and other members would feel more comfortable if the Premier were in the chamber. It is incumbent upon the opposition to raise this matter at the first possible opportunity. That is the procedure of this house. I did not move this motion; the Leader of the Opposition did. Members cannot say that the Leader of the Opposition has not raised this matter at the first possible opportunity. It just happens to be at a time when the Premier is not in the house, which is unfortunate. This is a very serious matter. This is a debate that we have to have. This has gone beyond just a few questions asked by the Leader of the Opposition. We now need to substantiate the statements made by the chairman of the committee. MR J.N. HYDE (Perth) [5.47 pm]: For the third time, on sitting day number 29, the opposition, which has no policies or vision, has decided to play the man. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr J.N. HYDE: On three occasions this procedural motion has been put against committee chairs. It was unfounded on the other two occasions, and it will be revealed to be unfounded again. Let us discuss this motion to suspend standing orders. I am a Labor Party member. I was not at the meeting with the Premier. My understanding is that during question time today at about 2.40 pm the Premier raised this issue and thanked three members. Question time ended at 2.55 pm. If this were such a pressing issue, the opposition had ample time to raise it at 2.55 pm. However, it waited until 5.30 pm to raise it, some three hours later, when it had concocted a plan. The opposition got wiped on the floor in Geraldton and was an embarrassment. The opposition has invented this as a stunt. The opposition does not appreciate now, and it did not previously, that members have a role as members of a committee and as local members of an electorate. In my role as the member for Perth, I told the previous Premier in late November that the outcomes-based education issue was being misread by the government and misinterpreted by the conservative forces. Much of the language was akin to a “less is less” neocon style. I was a member of the committee, but I saw the previous Premier as the local member and told him that the New South Wales standards-based education system, which is the same system as ours, has a better examination system than that planned for Western Australia. We should be looking at this motion. I went to the previous Premier as the local member. I did not go as a member of the committee and I discussed nothing as a member of the committee. The problem with the opposition is that its members live in a culture in which they do not talk to their leader, whomever it is this week. We talk to our leader as constituency members, not as committee members. Members opposite cannot understand the difference, but we do. The chairman of the committee has acted with full propriety, as the previous two chairs did when the opposition raised a similar stunt during the electoral cycle. As local members of Parliament, we know our role very well. I am delighted that we have a Premier who will talk to one member, four members, five members or three members. Opposite are a whole bevy of people who will not talk to each other. Mr A.D. McRae: It is interesting that the three members on our side were willingly identified and that members opposite requested that they remain anonymous. Mr J.N. HYDE: That is a very good point. I urge all members of the house to defeat this motion so that we can get back to real policy, real vision and the future of Western Australia.
3534 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe) [5.51 pm]: I support this very fair-minded motion. It makes no accusation. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr C.J. BARNETT: The motion is that standing orders be suspended so as to allow the Premier to give an explanation of the answer he gave to a question asked by the Leader of the Opposition. When asked a fairly straightforward question about outcomes-based education, which is a major contemporary issue, the Premier responded by naming three Labor members with whom he had discussions who happen to be members of that committee. Mr T.G. Stephens: Why would he do that if he had done something wrong? Mr C.J. BARNETT: Perhaps because he was careless. There is an issue, and in the limited debate we have had to this point the chairman of that committee has in fact said that he called the meeting. The member for Bassendean and the member for Wanneroo have admitted that they were at the meeting, so we know that a meeting was held between a Labor Premier and three Labor members of a parliamentary committee. This Parliament has standing orders stating that what is discussed by and the evidence given to committees are confidential. Did the members discuss or anticipate what the findings of that committee might be? Did the Premier inquire what the findings might be? Let us hear from the Premier. That is what this motion is about. The Premier must be accountable. He is the one who named those members. If they are unhappy, they should blame him for naming them in this Parliament. Members on this side of the house were not invited to the meeting. They did not know about it. Had the Premier wanted the advice of the committee, he could have formally gone to the committee and sought to sit down with the committee to discuss the issue. He could have asked for an interim report. He could have acted formally, but he chose not to; he chose to meet with three Labor members. We do not know whether privilege of evidence was breached or whether there were discussions about what the committee may or may not find. I am not a member of the committee, so I do not know. The Leader of the Opposition is not a member of the committee. It is entirely appropriate that we move this very straightforward motion to simply ask the Premier to come into the chamber to explain his answer. I have never known a Premier who has stood in this Parliament and said that he has had private discussions with three members of his party who were members of a committee that was close to concluding a parliamentary report. I am glad that the Premier has arrived in the chamber. I hope that he does not run from this issue but gets up and gives us an explanation. That is all we have asked. The member for Central Kimberley-Pilbara may carry on. We have had the ridiculous contribution of the member for Perth, which is all we ever get from him. This is a straightforward motion. It gives the Premier a straightforward opportunity to explain his answer. That is all it is. MR A.J. CARPENTER (Willagee - Premier) [5.55 pm]: I have never heard so much rot in all my life. It has been the biggest load of claptrap I have ever heard. The reason I did not name everybody is that I did not think that everybody would want to be named. Does the member want me to name him? Mr C.J. Barnett: I was not at the meeting. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Not people at the meeting, but the people who have given me information, suggestions and support about the issues of outcomes-based education. Mr P.D. Omodei: That is not the issue. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Yes, it is. Mr P.D. Omodei: The only people who were at the meeting were committee members. Mr T. Buswell: You can name any people you want to. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: A process has been going on involving the committee of which those three are members - always publicly, as far as I know. There have been issues to do with outcomes-based education, which was an issue before we came to government. I believe that those members of the committee, acting as members of Parliament, had every right to raise the issue with me and to tell me that they wanted those issues resolved by the government. I thank them for it. They kept me on my mettle as Premier, responsible for the performance of government, and as a former Minister for Education who had a stake in the issue, because, picking up from the previous Minister for Education, I oversaw the process of introducing outcomes-based education throughout our schools. The concept that somehow or other there has been some breach of privilege in discussion in some meeting is nonsense - utter nonsense. It is just as nonsensical to suggest that somehow or other, because I became involved
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3535 in the discussions and resolution of these issues, the Minister for Education and Training was not doing her job. It is as nonsensical as that. One of those three members of Parliament is a former schoolteacher who had a great deal of information to offer me about the impact of outcomes-based education and how it could be resolved and who offered some guidelines about what needed to be done. Mr C.J. Barnett: What about the other members of the committee? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: What other members? Mr C.J. Barnett: You named three members. That is the issue. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: They came and spoke to me. I named three members. Are they members of a secret society? Do we have an issue of national security? They were sitting on a committee that was holding public hearings into the issue. Are they members of some secret society and not allowed to talk to me about the issue? They did something in the interests of the state and tried to alert me to the fact that there were issues there. Mr P.D. Omodei: Did they breach standing orders? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Of course not. Mr P.D. Omodei: What did you talk about? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: They spoke to me about outcomes-based education and the feedback they were getting about the issue. The reason they were the focus of that feedback is that they were on that committee. People identified them, so they came and spoke to me about those issues. Do members know what the problem is now? Tragically for the opposition, we have made massive progress in the resolution of this issue. Not every member opposite - I excuse one or two members on the other side of the house from this generalisation - but some members opposite want this issue to go on forever unresolved, so they will have a political gain to belt the government with. Poor old The West Australian is running out of an angle. It cannot now make the crazy assertions it has been making day after day, month after month, because we are resolving these issues. It needs another angle; that somehow or other some evil concoction has been cooked up between these three shocking, conspiratorial members of the committee, who are not allowed to come to speak to me about an issue of the day. Of course they are allowed to. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Members opposite do not understand the issue of privilege. The members who came to see me did not in any sense breach privilege; they raised the issue in general with me and said, “These are the matters that the people are saying need to be resolved.” I was not able to sit in on those public hearings of the committee. I did not want to have to rely on the less than accurate reports. The members did me a favour, and I am quite prepared to thank them for it. Mr C.J. Barnett: Why didn’t you name me? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Does the member for Cottesloe want me to? Mr C.J. Barnett: I made a speech in Parliament. It is on the public record. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I am grateful to the member for Cottesloe. He also provided me with some advice, and I thank him for it. I did not want to identify him today because I thought I might embarrass him. Putting party politics aside, he came to me with suggestions about how we could work through the issue. They were very good suggestions. I did not mention him today because I thought I might embarrass him. There was no breach of privilege. The members came to see me as concerned members of Parliament. Mr C.J. Barnett: You have compromised that committee by having that meeting, and you should have known that, just as the chairman, the member for Bassendean and the member for Wanneroo should have known that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: That is a load of nonsense. I want to thank the members from both sides of Parliament who helped me resolve this issue. Mr P.D. Omodei: It’s not over. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The member is right; it is not over. We have a union meeting in a week. I thank the member for Perth for his interest in all issues. I thank the member for Cottesloe for constructive engagement on this issue. There was no breach of privilege. The members did the right thing, not the wrong thing. They are to be commended for it. MRS D.J. GUISE (Wanneroo - Deputy Speaker) [6.02 pm]: Mr Speaker, if there is one thing - Point of Order Mr J.H.D. DAY: Mr Speaker, is it the intention of the house to break for dinner?
3536 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
The SPEAKER: No, it is not. I call the member for Wanneroo. Debate Resumed Mrs D.J. GUISE: I rise to speak on this motion to suspend standing orders. I am well aware of how this place works, so this may be my only chance to speak. I welcome the debate however we have it, but I will speak to this motion at this point. If there is one thing we bring to this place that I hope members of Parliament hold onto, it is our own personal integrity. As Deputy Speaker of this place and chairman of committees, if members think for a minute that I would put myself in a position in which I would be in breach of those committee rules and the standing orders that I work to uphold, they are all seriously mistaken. Mr T.K. Waldron: The Premier says that you have. Mrs D.J. GUISE: I ask the member to hear me out. My interest in education is well known. For those new members who may not know, I spent many years as a representative of the parents and citizens associations in this state, as the president of the WA Council of State School Organisations and as a senior vice-president of the Australian Council of State School Organisations. My interest in education is unbounded and has not changed. My network in education is still intact. If members think for a minute that as a member of this Parliament I walk around blindfold, deaf and dumb, not listening to my community, they are also seriously mistaken because engaging with community is part of my role as a member of this place. As a member of this place and a member of the Labor caucus, I have the right to bring the concerns of my community to my leader. The minute I do not, the committee system in this place is stuffed. If I cannot bring my concerns to my leader and my parliamentary caucus, I begin to become a useless member of Parliament. There are two separate issues. One is how I act in my role as the member for Wanneroo and the other is how I act in my role as a member of the Education and Health Standing Committee. I know where the bounds are. There is only a breach of parliamentary privilege if I share any information, deliberations or discussions within that committee during any conversation outside that committee. If I share anything from those committee deliberations or discussions in any way, shape or form, I would be in contempt of Parliament. I am telling members that I did not do so. I brought to the Premier the concerns of my constituents and the parents, students and teachers of some of the schools in my electorate who were not fully engaged in OBE. That is all I did. As a member of this place, I have the right to do that. In terms of my own personal integrity, I know that I have not acted in breach of those rules, nor would I, but at the end of the day I accept the fact that all members have is my word. I can sleep at night. Members opposite have a problem if they think I have breached those rules, because I know I have not. MR M.P. WHITELY (Bassendean) [6.05 pm]: The member for Wanneroo hit it on the head when she said that if we cannot act in the interests of our constituents and if we cannot pursue issues that are important and vital to our constituents, issues with which we have a passion and an interest, we have no right to be in this place. I have a background in education, being a former schoolteacher. I have a passion for this issue. It is an issue that is in the public arena. It is in the paper every day. We said to the Premier that we wanted him to start taking this issue seriously. We wanted him to look at this issue. Every hearing of this committee has been public. We closed one hearing for five minutes at one stage, but every other hearing has been public. I have been personally critical of the implementation of the new program in public hearings. The press has not bothered to report it, members opposite have not bothered to read about it and they have not even bothered to roll up to the committee hearings. I will tell members opposite about a secret meeting I had last week. They should build this into their conspiracy theory. I am about to meet the man for dinner. I met twice with Greg Williams, the founder of People Lobbying Against Teaching Outcomes, in my house to hear his concerns and to see how we can go forward. I met with him because the government and PLATO think they are miles apart. I do not think they are. As a former schoolteacher, I thought he and I could share some ideas, find some common ground and pass that information on. Mr R.F. Johnson: Did he make submissions to your committee? Mr M.P. WHITELY: He did. I also met with him about 14 months ago, before the committee held hearings. Members should build Greg Williams into their conspiracy theory. I am about to have dinner with him and the Minister for Education and Training. I am going to be late so I will have to apologise. They should build that into their conspiracy theory. These hearings were all public. The member for Wanneroo and I, with extremely strong backgrounds in education, were critical throughout the whole process of aspects of the implementation. We did not think the government was taking it seriously enough, so we went to the Premier and in no uncertain terms made that message clear to him. Mr R.F. Johnson: Who is “we”? Mr M.P. WHITELY: Me, the member for Wanneroo and the member for Central Kimberley-Pilbara. We asked the Premier to take this issue seriously. We said it in colourful language and we said it forcefully and the
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3537
Premier heard it. I think this nonsense should end. I will have to apologise to Greg Williams, the founder of PLATO, for keeping him waiting. Members opposite should build that into their conspiracy theory. We did nothing wrong, except deliver good government for the people of Western Australia. Question put and a division taken with the following result - Ayes (19)
Mr C.J. Barnett Mr M.J. Cowper Mr P.D. Omodei Mr M.W. Trenorden Mr M.J. Birney Mr J.H.D. Day Mr D.T. Redman Mr T.K. Waldron Mr T.R. Buswell Mr B.J. Grylls Mr A.J. Simpson Ms S.E. Walker Mr G.M. Castrilli Dr K.D. Hames Mr G. Snook Dr S.C. Thomas (Teller) Dr E. Constable Mr J.E. McGrath Mr T.R. Sprigg Noes (26)
Mr J.J.M. Bowler Mr R.C. Kucera Mr N.R. Marlborough Mr D.A. Templeman Mr A.J. Carpenter Mr F.M. Logan Mr M.P. Murray Mr P.B. Watson Mr J.B. D’Orazio Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan Mr A.P. O’Gorman Mr M.P. Whitely Dr J.M. Edwards Mr J.A. McGinty Ms M.M. Quirk Mr B.S. Wyatt Mrs D.J. Guise Mr M. McGowan Ms J.A. Radisich Mr S.R. Hill (Teller) Mr J.N. Hyde Ms S.M. McHale Mr E.S. Ripper Mr J.C. Kobelke Mr A.D. McRae Mr T.G. Stephens
Pairs
Mr G.A. Woodhams Mrs J. Hughes Dr G.G. Jacobs Mrs C.A. Martin Mr R.F. Johnson Mr J.R. Quigley Ms K. Hodson-Thomas Mrs M.H. Roberts Question thus negatived. Sitting suspended from 6.12 to 7.15 pm SOLICITOR-GENERAL AMENDMENT BILL 2006 Second Reading Resumed from 10 May. MS S.E. WALKER (Nedlands) [7.15 pm]: The opposition supports this bill. I thank Mrs Judy Taseff from the State Solicitor’s Office for the briefing I received and the very comprehensive letter she sent to me. She is a senior assistant state solicitor. I also thank the State Solicitor, Mr Tim Sharp. When I first attended the meeting I thought that the Solicitor-General’s position was going to be downgraded to that of a public servant. That is why I rang Mrs Taseff and asked for examples of other positions in the state of people who had shorter terms of appointment. I will come back to that. When I brought this matter before the party room this morning my colleagues were adamant that the status of a Solicitor-General remain as an independent statutory office. When I first received a briefing on this bill I thought that the position would be downgraded. I looked at the origins of the 1969 act, which were very interesting. In 1969 the Liberal government introduced a bill into the Assembly that altered the then office, functions, terms and conditions of the person who would be next appointed as Western Australian Solicitor-General. I am not sure whether there have been amendments between then and now. Here we are, nearly 40 years later, amending the bill again concerning the office and conditions of the next person to be appointed as Solicitor-General when the current Solicitor-General retires on his 65th birthday, which he is obliged to do under the Solicitor-General Act 1969. I will come to the contents of that act shortly. Nearly 40 years ago, when the bill was second read on 24 April 1969, the then Solicitor-General was Mr S.H Good, QC. He had recently retired on 29 January 1969 and had been the Solicitor-General for 23 years. I do not know whether Mr Good, QC, went on to become a Supreme Court judge. I know that Mr Ronald Wilson, QC, went on to become a judge of the High Court. Mr Kevin Parker, QC, who was the Solicitor-General when I was at that office, went on to become a judge of the Supreme Court. He is now with an international court. I understand Mr Good was appointed under the provisions of the Public Service Act. However, when the Liberal government chose Mr Good’s successor, Ronald Wilson, QC, a decision was made by the then Minister for Justice to convert the office to one of an independent statutory office. When I read the second reading speech from 1969, I thought that Western Australia was the last state to create an independent statutory office for a Solicitor-General. Some research showed me that we were the third jurisdiction in Australia after the Commonwealth and Victoria. The duties, terms and conditions of appointment to the office of Solicitor-General in this state were found wanting in 1969. Why was that? As explained to this house then, Mr Good started life as the Solicitor-General in 1946 with four staff. By 1969 he had 40 staff. Instead of appearing as counsel for the state in all serious matters of constitutional and state significance, much
3538 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] of his time, as I understand it, was taken up with administrative matters. Because he was so busy doing that, other counsel, such as the then Crown counsel, Ronald Wilson, QC, had to represent the state in the High Court. According to my predecessor, the then member for Nedlands, the government view of this was recorded in Hansard. As I said earlier, in 1969 the then Solicitor-General, Mr S.H. Good, QC, had retired. The member for Nedlands at that time, Charles Court, stated - It is sound policy to review the duties of any position which has been occupied by any one person for a long period. The Minister for Justice decided to undertake such a review and, with this purpose in view, sought information from the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth and each of the States as to the duties, and terms and conditions, of appointment to the office of Solicitor-General in their jurisdictions. He went on to state - The general view was that the policy of providing for the office of a Solicitor-General independently of the Public Service was to be highly commended and that it should be filled by the best available person, whether he was a public servant or not. . . . The Commonwealth Attorney-General in his reply stated, inter alia - One of the special merits of our system (that of the Solicitor-General appearing as counsel) is that the High Court in particular may explore in a case peripheral or related matters which it is difficult to foresee and on which it is difficult to brief outside counsel adequately. The same argument applies with equal force to the position of the States. Attorneys-General are agreed on the advantages of having the Solicitor-General representing the State as counsel. In the Privy Council, the High Court, and the Supreme Court, the Solicitor- General is accorded the respect and consideration appropriate to his office and considerable attention is paid to his submissions. His standing is considered to be enhanced by his appointment independent of the public service. That is why I was concerned when I thought that we were taking a retrograde step. The then member for Nedlands continued - Constitutional matters in dispute are of considerable importance to the State and the need for the best representation is apparent if State rights are to be protected. The then member for Nedlands also referred to Mr Ronald Wilson, of whom he spoke very highly. It would appear that all the reasons given nearly 40 years ago for the creation of the independent office of the Solicitor- General were considered to be very appropriate. The then member for Nedlands also said - There should be no cause for concern about the proposal to remove the position from the provisions of the Public Service Act. This decision will ensure that all the time of the Solicitor-General will be utilised in undertaking work commensurate with his position. Apart from appearing as a counsel on behalf of the State, he will be available to give opinions and advice on such matters as may be referred to him. He will continue to be the second law officer after the Attorney-General and will undertake any duties as directed by the latter. However, he will not be required to carry out administrative functions. . . . The Bill, which is a simple one, proposes conditions of appointment similar to those endured by Solicitors-General in other places. The salary has been related to that of puisne judge of the Supreme Court. Provision is made for the period of service as Solicitor-General to be regarded as period of service as a judge for the purpose of a judge’s pension should an occupant of the office be subsequently appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court. This qualifying period is important as the office will attract men who otherwise would likely to be appointed to the Supreme Court Bench and who might be elevated to the court after a period of office as Solicitor-General. In fact, that happened. It also happened with Mr Kevin Parker, QC. The former member for Nedlands continued - It is proposed that Mr. R. D. Wilson, Q.C., will be appointed Solicitor-General under the provisions of the new Act. He is known to members and well regarded by the judiciary of all of courts before which he has appeared. His appointment as Solicitor-General will enhance his status before the courts and ensure the State is represented in the best possible manner. During consideration in detail, I will ask the Attorney General to answer a few questions, although I do not expect -
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3539
Mr J.A. McGinty: I will not let you down. Ms S.E. WALKER: I think the Attorney General might let me down; however, I am used to that so I will not worry about it. From my experience at the crown, apart from the positions of Attorney General and Solicitor-General, the senior positions in the state legal profession are held by Mr George Tannin, SC, crown counsel, and Mr Tim Sharp, the State Solicitor. The Crown Solicitor’s office used to be a part of the Crown Law Department. When I joined after many years in private enterprise, the Office of Crown Prosecutor also existed. At that time it was occupied by Graeme Scott, QC, whom I worked for as a professional assistant for about seven months. I think at that time Hon Joe Berinson was Attorney General. In any event, Crown Law split and the independent statutory office of the Director of Public Prosecutions was created and the Crown Solicitor’s Office was created. The then Crown Solicitor was Mr Peter Panegyres. I do not know how many years he held office; however, it was a long time, and probably too long. The Attorney General’s second reading speech mentions the importance of the Solicitor- General Office and the work undertaken by the Solicitor-General. The Attorney stated - The Solicitor-General not only represents this state in important constitutional law and other cases before the High Court, but also provides legal advice to the government on a range of issues, including the state’s constitutional powers, administrative law and jurisdictional issues concerning courts. In addition, the Solicitor-General provides the Attorney General with advice and recommendations on various law reform proposals. I have become quite interested in the history of Crown Law. Perhaps during consideration in detail the Attorney General will advise me about the position of the Under Secretary for Law, and how that position has changed over the years. In any event, it is clear that the member for Nedlands in 1969 had an extraordinarily high regard for Mr Ronald Wilson, QC, as he then was. I will remind the Assembly about what Mr Bertram, the member for Mount Hawthorn, said in 1969, as recorded on page 3558 of Hansard - I think it is very good that the man to be appointed should be placed as near as possible to the status of a puisne judge of the Supreme Court. Suffice then in conclusion to say it is good to see that Mr. Wilson has been appointed to this office, as I am aware of the tremendous skill and energy he possesses. I understand he has come up from the lower rungs of the Crown Law Department; that he served in the last war; that after he returned he studied; and that from then on he has gone from strength to strength. It is wonderful to see the success he has achieved. I am sure that I speak for every member on this side of the House when I extend to him congratulations on his appointment. Ronald Wilson went on to much greater things, and was later knighted. The Liberal Party supports this bill. It is not stated in the second reading speech, but I understand why the Attorney General wants to change, not the qualifications, but the tenure of office. If someone is appointed now at the age of 40, he can remain in the position until the age of 65. Under these new provisions the incumbent is entitled to a renewable term of up to seven years, fixed by the Governor. According to my reading of the 1969 legislation, at the moment the salary is related to that of a judge of the Supreme Court, with a similar pension. Three months’ long service leave is available after seven years, and the leave entitlements are the same as for public servants, as I understand. Under the new legislation, the newly appointed Solicitor-General will have his salary set by the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal. His leave and other conditions will be set by the Governor. This is a very simple bill, and it is not unusual. Mrs Judith Taseff sent me a note about some research she had done. It reads - I refer to our meeting at Parliament House on 11 May 2006, during which I undertook to provide you with further information . . . She refers to the term of office in the Western Australian Solicitor-General Act 1969, and other acts around Australia. The note continues - As noted in the Bill’s Second Reading Speech, this amendment brings the Western Australian office of Solicitor-General into line with the approach taken in: 1. the Commonwealth, where a person appointed as Solicitor-General “shall be appointed by the Governor-General for such period, not exceeding 7 years, as the Governor-General determines, but is eligible for reappointment”; and 2. Queensland, where the Solicitor-General shall “be appointed for a term not exceeding 5 years determined by the Governor in Council and specified in the instrument of his or her appointment” and “be eligible for reappointment upon the expiration of his or her term of appointment”. In the Commonwealth, the current Solicitor-General was appointed for an initial term of 5 years, and has recently had his tenure renewed for a further term of 5 years . . .
3540 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
In Victoria and New South Wales the Solicitor-General can be appointed for a fixed or indefinite term. Victorian appointments have traditionally been for an initial period of 10 years . . . In the Northern Territory the Solicitor-General can be appointed for a fixed term, but must retire at the age of 65. As I understand it, under this bill, the retirement age of the Solicitor-General is open-ended. Mrs Taseff also refers to statutory officeholders in Western Australia appointed by the Governor for a fixed term not exceeding a statutory maximum term. Some examples are: the Inspector of Custodial Services, seven years; the Director of the Office of Health Review, five years; the Public Advocate, five years; the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, seven years; the Director of Equal Opportunity in Public Employment, a period not exceeding four years; and the Freedom of Information Commissioner, a period not exceeding seven years. There are many more. The opposition does not have a problem with this bill. I do not know whether members will have many questions during consideration in detail, but I do not expect that to take very long. I understand that the Solicitor-General’s birthday is very soon. I am not sure whether this bill will be enacted on his birthday, because I thought it might be entitled “Bob’s Birthday Bill”. In any event, the opposition has no problem with the Attorney General renewing Mr Meadows’ term of office. That is entirely a decision for the Attorney General. The opposition supports this bill. MR T.K. WALDRON (Wagin) [7.35 pm]: The National Party will also support this bill. It seems to be a commonsense bill. It will amend the Solicitor-General Act 1969, and it will increase the participation of legal talent in the office of the Solicitor-General. It will also enact changes to the remuneration of the Solicitor- General. The main proposal is an alteration to the tenure, which will be a fixed term not exceeding seven years, after which the Solicitor-General will be eligible for reappointment. The current act states that the Solicitor- General, once appointed by the Governor, can remain in that position until the age of 65 years. The bill removes that retirement age of 65 years, which makes a fair bit of sense. As the member for Nedlands said, it will also allow the current Solicitor-General, Robert Meadows, QC, to reapply for the position for the fixed tenure of seven years. In fact, I think he reaches the statutory retirement age on 18 July 2006. Is that correct? Mr J.A. McGinty: That is right. Mr T.K. WALDRON: There we go. The salary is also mentioned in the bill. The commitment in the current act could make the term too long and dissuade talented young people in the legal profession from accepting the position of Solicitor-General. It could be said that that effect could deter some of the brightest young lawyers from being in a position to advise the government. Currently, I understand the Solicitor-General receives the same salary and entitlements as a Supreme Court judge, including a judicial pension of 60 per cent of his salary after reaching 60 years of age and completing 10 years of service. This bill provides for the remuneration of the Solicitor-General to be decided by the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal. As mentioned previously, the government will determine the other terms and conditions that will apply. I understand that the amended salary to be paid to the Solicitor-General will be closer to that of the commonwealth Solicitor-General. I assume that will be an increase. Mr J.A. McGinty: He will not get the judicial superannuation, which is the trade-off. Mr T.K. WALDRON: How will he end up? Mr J.A. McGinty: He will be on the same superannuation as backbenchers in the state Parliament. Mr T.K. WALDRON: The poor fellow! I presume the Attorney General is referring to the newer backbenchers! I noticed another provision of the bill allows for an acting Solicitor-General to be appointed for a fixed period of 12 months, and to be eligible for reappointment. Is that eligibility for reappointment intended to extend the term of the acting appointment, or the position itself? Mr J.A. McGinty: It will only relate to the acting position. Mr T.K. WALDRON: Only the acting position. Provisions are made to ensure that, if the current Solicitor- General is reappointed, his entitlements under the legislation prior to the amendment will remain. Is that correct? Mr J.A. McGinty: That is right. It is my intention that Mr Meadows be offered a contract under the new legislation to remain as Solicitor-General, in which case his salary and conditions will remain as they currently are - linked to those of a Supreme Court judge, rather than independently determined. Mr T.K. WALDRON: It is a bit like the situation with members of Parliament before 2001. Mr J.A. McGinty: It is also a question of quality, in that case. Mr T.K. WALDRON: That opens up a whole new debate, but we will not get into that now!
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3541
This seems like commonsense legislation. The removal of the compulsory retirement age of 65 years seems like a good move to me. The National Party agrees with that, and we support the bill. MR J.A. McGINTY (Fremantle - Attorney General) [7.39 pm]: I thank members for their indications of support for the bill. We are in a state of transition at the moment. We have recently had the retirement of the Chief Justice. The other very senior legal officer in the state is the Solicitor-General, and I thought it was desirable to maintain stability at the top with the senior legal officers of the state. It was desirable that Rob Meadows, who has done an excellent job under both governments, should continue in that position. He would have been prevented by the operation of the existing law from doing that beyond his birthday on 18 July, when he turns 65 years of age. This bill will remove a discriminatory provision. It will also be a practical aid to enable us to move into a more modern era in which officers such as this are appointed for a term, rather than for life. It will accomplish a long-term objective, as well as a short-term objective. I thank members for their support for this change and for their timely dealing with it. Question put and passed. Bill read a second time. Consideration in Detail Clauses 1 and 2 put and passed. Clause 3: The Act amended - Mr J.A. McGINTY: I move - Page 2, line 6 - To delete “section 12” and substitute - sections 11A and 12 Ms S.E. WALKER: Can the Attorney General explain the purpose of this change? Mr J.A. McGINTY: The substantive change will be made in the next amendment that I will move. This is simply a consequential amendment, if I can move a consequential amendment before the substantive amendment! The next amendment will insert new clause 11A, which will make provision for an amendment to the Equal Opportunity Act as a consequence of the passage of the substantive provisions. If I deal with the substantive amendment, it will make some sense of this amendment. Section 66ZN of the Equal Opportunity Act provides for an exemption from the general non-discriminatory provisions of that act. It enables a person to discriminate in relation to the retirement age, particularly of judicial officers. The section in part reads - (2) Nothing in this Part renders it unlawful for a person to discriminate in accordance with an Act against a person who holds the office of - (a) Judge . . . (b) Master . . . (c) District Court Judge . . . (d) Family Court Judge . . . (e) Judge or magistrate within the meaning of the Children’s Court of Western Australia Act . . . (f) stipendiary magistrate . . . (g) President or Commissioner within the meaning of the Industrial Relations Act . . . (h) the Judge within the meaning of the Liquor Licensing Act . . . or (i) Solicitor-General or acting Solicitor-General within the meaning of the Solicitor- General Act . . . That provision of the Equal Opportunity Act was thought necessary to enable a discriminatory retirement age to be applied to both judges and magistrates. A mandatory retirement age of 65 for the Solicitor-General was seen to be a discriminatory provision. I am not sure how it slipped by our notice, but when Hon Giz Watson from the Greens (WA) met with me last week, she drew my attention to the fact that we also needed to draft an amendment to the Equal Opportunity Act to remove the ability to discriminate against the Solicitor-General on the basis of retirement age if we were removing the discrimination. Ms S.E. Walker: This will be open ended now. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes, that is right. Ms S.E. Walker: It could be 90. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It could be.
3542 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Ms S.E. Walker: You could get the job, in fact. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It is very kind of the member to think that. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Subject to that qualification, yes. The substantive amendment that I will move has been drawn to my attention by the Greens; that is, that there is no longer a need to legislatively enable discrimination if the cause of that discrimination is being removed. That will be dealt with in the next amendment I will move. However, this amendment to insert the words “sections 11A and 12” in clause 3 of the bill will enable that subsequent provision to be inserted. Amendment put and passed. Clause, as amended, put and passed. Clause 4 put and passed. Clause 5: Section 3 amended - Ms S.E. WALKER: Can the Attorney General outline the different roles of the State Solicitor, the State Counsel and the Solicitor-General? Is there any other role that would complete the picture of representation of the state at a high legal level? Mr J.A. McGINTY: The State Counsel, Mr George Tannin, SC, has the job substantially of appearing in court and providing advice as would be expected from counsel. He provides that advice and representation primarily on behalf of the state. The State Solicitor, Mr Tim Sharp, is a solicitor and provides the totality of legal services to the state. The statutory functions of the Solicitor-General are listed in section 9 of the Solicitor-General Act 1969, which states - The Solicitor-General - (a) may act as counsel for the Crown in right of the State and for any other body or person for whom the Attorney General requests him to act, and may perform such other duties of counsel as the Attorney General directs; and (b) may exercise, subject to this Act, any powers and functions conferred on the Solicitor-General by any Act of the State or the Commonwealth, whether passed before or after the coming into operation of this Act. Generally speaking, the Solicitor-General represents the state in matters before the High Court and some matters that require intervention in state courts, particularly if a constitutional matter is being raised. The Solicitor- General provides me with regular advice, particularly on constitutional matters, but also on high-level legal policy matters within the state. For instance, the Solicitor-General conducts consultation on my behalf with the judiciary, the Law Society, Women Lawyers of WA, the Western Australian Bar Association and, if need be, with the Criminal Lawyers Association or, in a family law matter, with the Family Law Practitioners Association of WA, in order to bring forward a recommendation to me that I can then take to cabinet on who should be appointed to a particular judicial office. Functions of that general nature are performed by the Solicitor-General. Obviously, from time to time the Solicitor-General’s advice would be sought on legislation, particularly if it involves a matter related to either the state or commonwealth Constitution. Ms S.E. Walker: Do you direct him? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I do not think I would be game to. Ms S.E. Walker: I thought I read somewhere that the Attorney General can direct him to look at an issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes, and I will give an example. I spoke to the Solicitor-General only yesterday on the question of compensation for Andrew Mallard. I suppose I have directed him to look into that matter and to provide me with advice on it. It would not be something on which I would direct him as a matter of law. The reason that we have a senior person like Rob Meadows and the Solicitors-General who have preceded him, all of whom have been eminent, is and has been to provide advice to the government of the day, particularly the Attorney General of the day, on high-level legal matters affecting the state, particularly matters that go to constitutional or judicial administration issues. Ms S.E. Walker: What sort of staffing does he have? Mr J.A. McGINTY: His office is located adjacent to the State Solicitor’s Office. I will double check on this, but I understand that he draws on staff from the State Solicitor’s Office. Ms S.E. Walker: Does he draw on the State Solicitor’s Office? Mr J.A. McGINTY: He draws on the expertise and staff of the State Solicitor’s Office. His staff comprises two people - a professional assistant and a secretary.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3543
Ms S.E. Walker: How long has the current Solicitor-General been in that position? Mr J.A. McGINTY: He was appointed by Cheryl Edwardes in the first half of the 1990s. I know that he has done 10 years, so he already qualifies for a judicial pension, if that is the import of the question. Ms S.E. Walker: No. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It is more than 10 years ago, as at the date of his birthday. There is no question of him needing this extension in order to qualify. I asked the Solicitor-General when it was that he was appointed. Ms S.E. Walker: I thought it was 11 years ago, but I do not know where I got that from. Mr J.A. McGINTY: If that were the case, it would make it 1995. Sorry, I am told it was 1994. Ms S.E. WALKER: In that case, the Attorney General’s second reading speech is incorrect. It says that he was appointed in 1995. In dealing with the Solicitor-General’s appointment in clause 5, I refer to the Attorney General’s second reading speech which states that Western Australia has had six eminent people serve as state Solicitor-General. How many of those people have gone on to become a judge? Was William Sayer a judge? Mr J.A. McGINTY: To the best of my information, and this is subject to correction, I am unaware that William Sayer, KC, James Walker, KC, or Sydney Good, QC, became judges, certainly not of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. Sir Ronald Wilson, QC, and Kevin Parker, QC, both became judges. Sir Ronald Wilson became a judge of the High Court and Kevin Parker of the state Supreme Court and now the International War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague. I very much doubt whether Robert Meadows will become a judge. Clause put and passed. Clause 6: Section 4 replaced by sections 4 and 4A - Ms S.E. WALKER: The salary, leave and entitlement of the Solicitor-General is one of the main provisions of this bill. Currently, the Solicitor-General is paid the same as a judge of the Supreme Court, but his entitlement to annual leave is the same as that of an officer of the public service and he is entitled to three months’ long service leave on full salary for each completed period of seven years of continuous service. Do the same leave entitlements apply to a Supreme Court judge? Do the entitlements come under the Public Service Act? Mr J.A. McGinty: I will need to double check that. Ms S.E. WALKER: Proposed new sections 4 and 4A indicate that the Solicitor-General will be remunerated at a salary determined by the Salary and Allowances Tribunal. From my discussions with the Attorney General, I understand that the next Solicitor-General, apart from the current Solicitor-General who will maintain the same entitlements or pay as a judge of the Supreme Court if he is reappointed, will have a greater salary, one would hope, than the current Solicitor-General to make up for not having a pension. Is that correct? Mr J.A. McGinty: Not necessarily, if we follow the commonwealth model. The commonwealth Solicitor- General is paid the same base salary as a Federal Court judge and then has a significant top up to make the package significantly in excess of the judge’s salary. Ms S.E. WALKER: Is that the commonwealth? Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes. Ms S.E. WALKER: What is the commonwealth Solicitor-General paid? Mr J.A. McGinty: The base salary is $349 270, which is the salary of a Federal Court judge. The total package offered to the commonwealth Solicitor-General is $466 490. Ms S.E. WALKER: Why will the Governor determine the leave of absence to which the Solicitor-General is entitled and the other terms and conditions of service that apply? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am unable to answer the question about the current leave entitlement of judges. I thought it may have been provided for in the Supreme Court Act, but it is not. It is possibly a determination of the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal. Ms S.E. Walker: Why has the Governor been made the person to determine when the Solicitor-General can go on leave? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I know the reason for that. Each of the other people who are senior officers is appointed for a term, and the member for Nedlands listed a number of them in her contribution to the second reading debate. That is the statutory provision that applies to them, and their leave is as determined by the Governor. In the normal course of events, we would expect the Governor to determine that the leave be that applicable to judges or public servants, or some reference point of that nature.
3544 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
However, I will go back to the point the member raised earlier about salary. The expectation is that Robert Meadows will be appointed to remain the Solicitor-General beyond 18 July, which is his sixty-fifth birthday, in which case he will continue to be paid as a Supreme Court judge and continue to attract the leave and superannuation or pension entitlements that he has currently accrued. That, in a sense, is not a bad option from the state’s point of view, because he has already qualified for a judicial pension, and so he will gain nothing pension-wise from the new arrangements. Ms S.E. Walker: He will still have the same leave entitlements as he has now under this - Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes. Everything will continue unchanged, assuming that appointment is made. I am, in a sense, pre-empting the Executive Council’s decision on this matter. However, that is certainly the intention, and I thought that I should be up front about that intention. The new appointee post Robert Meadows would have those conditions. The salary would be determined by the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal. The best reference point, I think, is most probably the commonwealth Solicitor-General, who has a comparable function, and there is an understood base to the determination of the base salary, which is that of a judge, plus the rest of the package to compensate for the absence of judicial superannuation or a judicial pension, among other things. Clause put and passed. Clause 7: Section 5 amended - Ms S.E. WALKER: The repeal of section 5(2) just leaves the age of the Solicitor-General open ended? That is it, is it? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes, it simply repeals the requirement that the Solicitor-General retire at the age of 65, or not be employed as Solicitor-General beyond the age of 65. Therefore, it leaves the question of age at large. Ms S.E. Walker: Why did you leave the age at large? Mr J.A. McGINTY: We could have inserted in this legislation the same retirement age as a judge, which is 70. We thought that it was best left to the decision of the government of the day, given that it is a fixed-term appointment and for a term of no longer than seven years. Therefore, if the government of the day makes that appointment, it is finite. Ms S.E. Walker: What about the Inspector of Custodial Services? Is there an age limit on that position? It would be in that act, would it not; that is, in the - Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes. There is no provision to enable that discrimination to occur. Given that the Inspector of Custodial Services legislation was passed in 1999 or thereabouts - it is of very recent origin - I would be very surprised if it contained an age restriction. None of the other statutory officers, other than judges, has an age restriction on him. Clause put and passed. Clause 8: Section 8 amended - Ms S.E. WALKER: This clause amends section 8 in the event of a vacancy occurring. Can the Attorney General please explain what this amendment does to section 8 of the current act? Mr J.A. McGINTY: This provision has been inserted to maintain consistency with those other senior statutory office holders to whom we have referred. The only substantive addition to the existing provisions is to provide that someone cannot be appointed as an acting Solicitor-General for a period greater than 12 months. That is to stop someone being appointed in an acting capacity on an ongoing basis, which I believe is desirable. The rest of the changes are simply a question of the method of expression rather than anything of substance. Clause put and passed. Clauses 9 to 11 put and passed. New clause 11A - Mr J.A. McGINTY: I move - Page 5, after clause 11 - To insert - 11A. Equal Opportunity Act 1984 amended (1) The amendments in this section are to the Equal Opportunity Act 1984. [*Reprint 4 as at 1 April 2005. For subsequent amendments see Western Australian Legislation Information Tables for 2005, Table 1, p.149 and Act No. 18 of 2005.] (2) Section 66ZN(2) is amended as follows:
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3545
(a) by deleting “the office of -” and inserting instead - “ any of the following offices - ”; (b) after paragraph (h) by deleting “; or” and inserting a comma; (c) by deleting paragraph (i). That amendment achieves the removal of the ability to discriminate in the Equal Opportunity Act. I believe we have already discussed that. New clause put and passed. Clause 12 put and passed. Title put and passed.
ENERGY SAFETY BILL 2005 Council’s Amendments Amendments made by the Council now considered. Consideration in Detail The amendments made by the Council were as follows - No 1 Clause 3, page 3, line 24 - To insert after “regulation” - including energy efficiency regulation No 2 Clause 3, page 3, line 25 - To insert after “safety” - and energy efficiency No 3 Clause 4, page 5, line 8 - To delete “months” and insert instead - weeks No 4 Clause 6, page 5, after line 21 - To insert - (d) a statement as to what proportion of the total amount proposed to be raised by levy is to be payable by participants in the electricity industry and what proportion is to be payable by participants in the gas industry; No 5 Clause 6, page 5, lines 23 to 27 - To delete the lines. No 6 Clause 6, page 6, after line 1 - To insert - (2) The proportions referred to in subsection (1)(d) - (a) in the first business plan are to be 67% for participants in the electricity industry and 33% for participants in the gas industry; (b) may be varied in the 6th business plan and each business plan on the expiry of a 5 year interval after the making of that business plan and not otherwise. No 7 Clause 14, page 9, line 13 - To delete “on or before 15 May in each year.” and insert instead - (a) in the case of the first notice published under this section, on or before the start of the next financial year; and (b) in the case of each subsequent notice, on or before 15 May in each year. No 8 Clause 18, page 12, line 10 - To delete “of 20% per annum” and insert instead - prescribed by the regulations
3546 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
No 9 Clause 23, page 16, line 7 - To insert after “Director” - of Energy Safety No 10 Clause 23, page 16, line 9 - To insert after “Director” - of Energy Safety No 11 Clause 23, page 16, line 18 - To insert after “Director” - of Energy Safety No 12 Clause 24, page 18, lines 7 to 9 - To delete “may retain a document or thing removed from the premises for so long as is necessary to examine it or copy it, or both.” and insert instead - must ensure that a person from whom a document or anything else is taken under this section and who would otherwise be entitled to possession of it is given a copy of it, or reasonable access to it, as appropriate. (7) If an investigator takes a photograph or makes a film under section 24(3)(d), a copy of that photograph or film must be provided to relevant persons. (8) If an investigator takes possession of anything under this section, the Director of Energy Safety must ensure that it is returned to the person entitled to possession of it as follows - (a) if it was taken in connection with the prosecution or possible prosecution of a suspected contravention of this Act - as soon as practicable after the relevant prosecution is completed or discontinued or, if no prosecution is commenced, as soon as practicable after the decision is made not to prosecute the suspected contravention; (b) in any other case - within 28 days after it was taken. No 13 Clause 25, page 18, lines 10 to 18 - To delete the clause. No 14 Clause 26, page 18, line 20 - To insert after “Director” - of Energy Safety No 15 Clause 28, page 19, line 2 - To insert after “officer” - or former chief executive officer No 16 Clause 28, page 19, line 2 - To insert after “Safety” - or former Director of Energy Safety, No 17 Clause 28, page 19, line 3 - To insert after “functions” - or formerly performing functions, No 18 Clause 28, page 19, line 3 - To insert after “Act” - or any other person to whom information or material is disclosed under this Act or who properly or improperly gains access to the information or material in some other way No 19 Clause 28, page 19, line 5 - To delete “in the course of duty” and insert instead - for the purposes of this Act
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3547
No 20 Clause 32, page 21, line 23 - To insert after “Director” - of Energy Safety No 21 New Part 4, page 12, after line 19 - To insert the following new Part - Part 4 - Objections and review 20. Grounds of objection (1) An energy industry participant may, in accordance with this section, object to a notice of assessment issued to that energy industry participant under section 16 on either or both of the grounds that there is an error in the chief executive officer’s - (a) determination that it is an energy industry participant liable to pay a levy; or (b) assessment of the amount to be paid by it by way of levy. (2) An objection under subsection (1) is to - (a) be made to the chief executive officer in writing within 42 days of the service of a notice of assessment under section 16; and (b) identify the relevant energy industry participant and assessment notice; and (c) set out fully and in detail the grounds of objection. (3) An objection under subsection (1) may be made by the energy industry participant named in notice of assessment or by the legal representative of that person. (4) The chief executive officer may, on written application by a person proposing to make an objection, extend in writing the time for making the objection for such period as the chief executive officer thinks fit. (5) The chief executive officer is to promptly consider any objection and may either disallow it or allow it, wholly or in part. (6) After making a decision on the objection the chief executive officer is to promptly serve upon the person by whom the objection was made written notice of the chief executive officer’s decision on the objection and a statement of the reasons for that decision. 21. Review of decision of chief executive officer on objection Any person who is dissatisfied with the decision of the chief executive officer on an objection by that person under section 20 may, within 42 days (or such further period as the State Administrative Tribunal, for reasonable cause shown by the person, allows) after service of notice of the decision, apply to the State Administrative Tribunal for a review of the decision. 22. Review of decision to refuse to extend time for objection A person who is dissatisfied with a decision of the chief executive officer to refuse to extend the time for making an objection against the notice of assessment may apply to the State Administrative Tribunal for a review of the decision. 23. New matters raised on review (1) Upon a review by the State Administrative Tribunal under section 21 or 22, the State Administrative Tribunal may consider - (a) grounds in addition to those stated in the notice of objection; and (b) reasons in addition to any reasons previously given for the chief executive officer’s decision that is under review. (2) The State Administrative Tribunal is to ensure, by adjournment or otherwise, that each party and any other person entitled to be heard has a reasonable
3548 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
opportunity of properly considering and responding to any new ground or reason that the State Administrative Tribunal proposes to consider in accordance with subsection (1). 24. Objection not to affect liability to pay levy The making of an objection under this Part does not affect the liability to pay any levy imposed under this Act pending determination of the objection. 25. Repayment of levy Any moneys paid by a person pursuant to a notice of assessment that is later disallowed in whole or in part on objection or review that are in excess of the amount that is required to be paid by that person in accordance with the decision of the objection or review are to be repaid to that person. Leave granted for amendments 1 and 2 to be considered together. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I move - That amendments 1 and 2 made by the Council be agreed to. Amendments put and passed; the Council’s amendments agreed to. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I move - That amendment 3 made by the Council be disagreed to and the following be substituted - Clause 4, page 5, line 8 - To delete “not later than 3 months”. Question put and passed. Leave granted for amendments 4 to 21 to be considered together. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I move - That amendments 4 to 21 made by the Council be agreed to. Mr A.J. SIMPSON: The opposition still opposes the bill, but it supports the amendments made by the Council. I thank the minister and his advisers for their help in this matter. Amendments put and passed; the Council’s amendments agreed to. The Council acquainted accordingly.
FAMILY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2006 Second Reading Resumed from 17 May. MS S.E. WALKER (Nedlands) [8.13 pm]: The opposition supports this bill. I do not believe the timing of this bill. This bill has 263 pages and it incorporates provisions of the commonwealth Family Law Act into the Western Australian Family Court Act. As I said, it has 263 pages and we received it just moments before the commonwealth legislation which relates to children is due to be enacted, and we have been told it is an urgent bill. I do not believe that the drafters of the legislation or anyone from the State Solicitor’s Office is to blame. I think it has been held up and I do not understand why. If this legislation does not go through quickly, we will find that there are two sets of legislation relating to children operating in this state and in other parts of Australia. The Attorney General also knows that this is uniform legislation and, when it goes to the upper house, it will have to be considered by a committee - it is mandatory. Therefore, I think it is very poor for the Attorney General to bring on this bill at such short notice, make it urgent and then come into the chamber today with pages of amendments. It is unbelievable. That may be because he does not want us to do any research on the commonwealth aspects of this legislation, which are tremendous. The changes that this bill will make to the repositioning of the Family Court in Australia are significant. The Attorney General did not even have the good grace to mention in his second reading speech some of the marvellous changes that will be made by the commonwealth to the Family Court! This bill deals with four major areas. I note in the second reading speech, the minister said - Importantly, the bill deals with shared parental responsibility, bankruptcy and child support issues. He did not mention parenting orders and he did not mention the $400 million that the commonwealth is putting into the new non-government service providers all over Australia and, in particular, Western Australia.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3549
I will give a brief overview of some of the new provisions. Clauses 81 to 100 refer to a new shared parental responsibilities regime. Briefly, these clauses reflect the commonwealth House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs 2003 paper, entitled “Every picture tells a story”. The bill accepts that more than one million children in Australia have a parent living elsewhere, and that one in four children in Australia sees only one of its parents once a year. After a long period of community consultation and the issuing of a discussion paper, the committee came to the conclusion that the money that parents waste on fighting each other in a court could be better spent on children. The commonwealth, therefore, adopted a cultural change on the litigation process in the Family Court to one of cooperation. For instance, a person cannot make an application for a parenting order unless that person attends a service and obtains a certificate. I will go into detail on that in a moment. The interests of the child are still paramount, but there is a presumption of shared responsibility. Equal time will be given only if it is in the best interests of the child. It means a mix of nights and days. It also allows special consideration to be given to relationships with people such as grandparents, and it ensures that children have the benefit of a meaningful involvement of both parents in their lives. It also ensures that parties will hopefully fulfil their responsibilities and meet their duties. I had a look at the discussion paper that the House of Representatives standing committee issued in 2003, after it conducted a wide-ranging inquiry into child custody arrangements in the event of family separation. It found that many Australian families are affected directly or indirectly by conflict, separation and divorce and that it was a significant community issue. As I said, that was reflected in the 1 700 submissions received by the committee and its report “Every picture tells a story”. It had a strong focus on the importance of reducing conflict between separated parents, and on separated fathers having greater involvement with the children. It emphasised the need for practical steps to be taken to reduce parenting disputes. On 29 July 2004, the Prime Minister released a statement responding to the committee’s report and proposing major reforms to the family law system. The statement emphasised the need to provide families with better ways of resolving relationship disputes and to reduce the emotional cost to families and children of conflict and separation. The statement also stressed the importance of providing assistance to families to avoid separation by ensuring that they have opportunities for pre-marriage education - which is something I think is marvellous; my parliamentary colleagues think the same - and help in dealing with relationship difficulties. As I understand it from the briefing, there has been a repositioning of the court concerning how the court will deal with counselling services. The federal government is pouring in an enormous amount of money to provide access to non-court- based family services for families. For instance, families can obtain counselling. Proposed section 47 in part 4 of the act states at clause 116 of the bill - For the purposes of this Act - “family counselling” means a process in which a family counsellor helps - (a) one or more persons to deal with personal and interpersonal issues arising from relationships covered by this Act; or (b) one or more persons (including children) who are affected, or likely to be affected, by the breakdown of a relationship covered by this Act to deal with either or both of the following - (i) personal and interpersonal issues; (ii) issues relating to the care of children. Confidentiality in family counselling is guaranteed except under certain conditions. Proposed section 49 states, in part - (4) A family counsellor may disclose a communication if the counsellor reasonably believes that the disclosure is necessary for the purpose of - (a) protecting a child from the risk of harm (whether physical or psychological); or (b) preventing or lessening a serious and imminent threat to the life or health of a person; or (c) reporting the commission, or preventing the likely commission, of an offence involving violence or a threat of violence to a person; or (d) preventing or lessening a serious and imminent threat to the property of a person; . . . The community also has available to it a family dispute resolution process, which is paid for by the commonwealth government through a non-court-based family service. The services are no longer in the court precincts; they are off the court precincts. A family dispute resolution is defined in the bill. Proposed section 51 states, in part -
3550 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
“family dispute resolution” is a process (other than a judicial process) - (a) in which a family dispute resolution practitioner helps people affected, or likely to be affected, by separation or divorce to resolve some or all of their disputes with each other; and (b) in which the practitioner is independent of all of the parties involved in the process. Proposed section 52 states, in part - “family dispute resolution practitioner” means - (a) a person who is a family dispute resolution practitioner for the purposes of the Family Law Act; I will go into that during consideration in detail. Confidentiality in communication is ensured except in certain circumstances, which I will not go into at the moment. The community will also have access to arbitration, which will involve a process other than a judicial process in which parties to a dispute will present arguments and evidence to an arbitrator who will make a determination to resolve the dispute. The bill contains provisions for family consultants within the precincts of the court. The functions of a family consultant are contained at proposed section 60 - The functions of family consultants are to provide services in relation to proceedings under this Act, including - (a) assisting and advising people involved in the proceedings; and (b) assisting and advising courts, and giving evidence, in relation to the proceedings; and (c) helping people involved in the proceedings to resolve disputes that are the subject of the proceedings; and (d) reporting to the court under section 73; and (e) advising the court about appropriate family counsellors, family dispute resolution practitioners and courses, programs and services to which the court can refer the parties to the proceedings. A magistrate of the court can now order parties to attend with a family consultant or one of the non-government service providers. The communications made to a family consultant are admissible in proceedings under the act. As I understand it, such a person assists the court in providing the magistrate with information so that most issues are settled prior to getting to court and that people have the ability to access counselling when trying to reconcile or sort out the parenting orders or property orders or in coming to terms with the separation. The commonwealth discussion paper mentions the new system, which is an enormous change to the current system of 30 years. The commonwealth government will establish 65 family relationship centres across the country to help parents agree on parenting arrangements after separation. It will be established as a visible entry point to the family law system and will provide a range of information, advice and dispute resolution services. Like the Job Network, family relationship centres will be run by community-based organisations. Each family relationship centre will provide similar services across the country. They will be nationally badged and have the same name and logo. They will provide a similar range of information and advice. The centres will offer practical early assistance, which will be available to all separating parents and their families. As I understand it, one has been established in Joondalup. Is that right, Attorney General? Mr J.A. McGinty: I think that is right. Ms S.E. WALKER: The Attorney General should know. He just does not want to admit it because it is a commonwealth project. Is there one or not? Mr J.A. McGinty: It is not within my area of responsibility. Ms S.E. WALKER: It is; it comes under the Family Law Act. Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes, but it is a commonwealth facility. Ms S.E. WALKER: That is probably why they are not mentioned in the second reading speech. The new family relationship centre in Joondalup - The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr A.P. O’Gorman): It is not established. Ms S.E. WALKER: It is not established? I hope I will be invited when it is opened. The new family relationship centres will focus on engaging with both parents to resolve disputes about children. They will encourage fathers to maintain a substantial role in their children’s lives immediately following a
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3551 relationship breakdown. Research has shown that, in the majority of cases, child custody arrangements put in place immediately following separation are still in place some years later. Although it will not be compulsory to use the family relationship centres, separating parents will be strongly encouraged to do so as early as possible after a separation. As well as a community education campaign, doctors, childcare centres, lawyers, schools and agencies such as Centrelink and the Child Support Agency will be asked to refer people to the centres as a first step in dealing with separation. The child support task force, which was established to re-evaluate the child support scheme, considered whether there was scope for the scheme to encourage couples to access the services at the centres. The centres will overcome the limitations associated with the family tribunal proposal. I will refer shortly to the specific help that can be provided by the centres. To be effective they will be supported by, and be the gateway to, a range of other relationship support services designed to provide more specialist help needed by many families to deal with conflict and to reach agreement. I think it is a marvellous thing because it takes all the acrimony and litigation from the bowels of the court as much as possible and transfers it to the community centres to enable people to deal with the emotional problems and the bitterness and anger that comes from separation. It will enable them to focus on the needs of their children before they reach agreement. Others may need intensive or longer term conflict resolution programs. That is why a range of services will be provided. Parenting plans are new. A primary aim of the system will be to encourage and assist parents to reach agreement on parenting arrangements after separation and to develop workable parenting plans that set out that agreement. As I understand it, this bill does away with all the old terminology that caused a hierarchical process that some people found very difficult. I am referring to guardianship and custody and those sorts of terms. They are all gone. A parenting plan will be in place. Such a plan will set out an agreement between parents about how they will manage their relationship in the future as far as it relates to their children. Setting out an agreement in a plan helps minimise misunderstanding and provides clarity for a family across a range of issues. The plan can contain anything that the parents think is relevant to them. Examples include who a child is to live with, the amount of time a child may spend with the other parent, the time the child may spend with other people such as grandparents, how the parental responsibility will be shared, maintenance, how handover will be managed, holiday arrangements and ways of resolving any future disputes. The relationship centres will be the primary source of help and encouragement in developing a parenting plan and will provide checklists on what parents could consider putting into a parenting plan. After the parents start there, if they like they can go on to use the counsellors, mediators and arbitrators. The system is aimed at emphasising resolving parenting disputes in a non-adversarial way and helping parents reach agreements without the need for lawyers. People can still use lawyers but, like mediators and counsellors, lawyers will be required to provide information to separating parents about parenting plans and either assist them to develop plans or tell them where they can get assistance. There will be group information sessions, and individual interviews with parenting advisers or joint sessions. The discussion paper looked at the major cause of conflict between separating parents, which is the breach of parenting agreements or court orders. The current process of seeking enforcement orders from the court escalates conflict and often does not resolve the problem, so the federal government is proposing a new approach to help parents deal with such things as breaches, using the family relationship centres and the contact orders program. I had a briefing last night and I went through this when I got home. As I understand it, under this provision magistrates will be given a wider range of powers to deal with things such as breaches of contact orders. It enables them, for instance, to give bonds of good behaviour for up to two years, cost orders, compensation orders and make-up time orders. They can imprison people for failing to pay child support, as I understand it, and they can impose suspended sentences. There is also a change in the jurisdiction of the magistrates of the Family Court. The acrimony is taken out of the courtroom and the courtroom precincts to a large extent. As I understand it, magistrates of the Family Court only have jurisdiction in a monetary range of up to $20 000. Under this bill, they will have a range up to $700 000 and, with the consent of parties, can go as high as they like. I do not know whether I am okay with that, but if it is what parents want, then so be it. Under this repositioning of the Family Court, a genuine effort must be made by parties to reach a resolution. They will not have to do that; they will not have to obtain a certificate if family violence or abuse is involved. One of the parties can make application to the court. To recap, the new regime involves non-court-based services involving a family counsellor, a family dispute resolution practitioner, an arbitrator and, within the court-based services, a family consultant who assists the magistrate, reports to him and generally tries to resolve all matters amicably prior to the matter going to court. I know from my reading that the commonwealth government has done an enormous amount of research on this. An enormous amount of time and effort has been put into it, and an enormous amount of money will be spent, so I hope that it works. When people break up, there is a tremendous amount of bitterness and anger and a lack of objectivity. I hope that this legislation takes some of that away. It is also a great thing if people who are suicidal can get access to counselling. One of the interesting aspects of this bill is that people will be penalised if they do not report when they commence proceedings in the Family Court that the property is the subject of a confiscation order. The bill
3552 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] includes amendments relating to the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000. It contains a whole range of provisions that I will not go into tonight, except to provide an example. Proposed section 205ZHA states, in part - If - (a) a person makes an application for an order, under this Division, with respect to - (i) the property of de facto partners, or either of them; or (ii) the maintenance of a de facto partner; and (b) the person knows that the property of the de facto partners, or either of them is the subject of - (i) a criminal confiscation order; or (ii) an application for a confiscation declaration, the person must - (c) disclose in the application the criminal confiscation order or application for a confiscation declaration; and (d) give to the court a sealed copy of that order or declaration. The penalty in each of those circumstances is a fine of $5 500. As I understand it, considering the Restraining Orders Act 1997, there is often some difficulty with bail conditions when a parent has been charged with sexual abuse of a child. Sometimes proceedings will commence in the Family Court and the court will allow the child access to the parent, or give an order for access, when a bail condition is in place stating that the accused parent is not allowed to see the child. The bail condition will dominate, and the accused will not be entitled to an order in the Family Court for access to the child while that bail condition is in place. However, as I understand it, when there is a violence restraining order and the magistrate of the Family Court becomes aware of it, he can still make provisions or make an order for the child to see the parent subject to the violence restraining order in certain circumstances. This might need looking at and I am a bit surprised by it. I would not have a difficulty with it, provided the magistrate understands the circumstances. However, according to our briefing, the magistrate does not get a fact sheet on the circumstances relating to the violence restraining order. That is a hole in the legislation that needs to be looked at. Eventually there will be, if it does not exist already, a national advice line and a web site on this new system. It will be a free service to people who are unable to access a centre, and there will be a free national family relationship advice line and web site. The proposal is to establish the centres in metropolitan and major regional centres around Australia over three years. Fifteen will be established in the first year that funding is available, and an implementation review will be conducted after the first year. Interestingly, there will be special help for grandparents. The committee that looked at this issue saw that grandparents play a central role in children’s lives but can feel cut off and helpless when families separate. While the federal Family Law Act at the moment does not provide for grandparents to seek orders relating to their grandchildren, including orders concerning contact and residence, many grandparents are not aware that they can do so, or simply want to have a role in their grandchildren’s lives without taking the matter to court. In the discussion paper, the government proposed to change the act to reinforce the role of grandparents. I had a look at that section last night, and we will probably get to it during consideration in detail. In particular, the government proposed an amendment to explicitly provide that time with grandparents be considered by the court when determining what is in the best interests of the child, and to change the act to make it clear that a parenting plan can deal with how a child is to have a continuing relationship with grandparents. Through the education campaign in the community, grandparents will be invited to use the relationship centres, and the government also proposes additional legal aid resources in recognition of the increased demand of more grandparents exercising their rights. All this has now come to pass and is a major part of this bill. I am not sure why, but there are provisions in the bill for the use of audio links and video links. I will be interested to know what sort of video and audio links are used at the moment in this area. I understand that a new appeal process will be implemented for magistrates’ decisions. At present, if a person wants to appeal a magistrate’s decision he can apply to the judge of the Family Court and be heard in a de nova hearing; that is, a hearing afresh. I am not sure whether people will have a choice, and perhaps we can deal with that in consideration in detail. One of the parties will be able to appeal on a matter of fact or a matter of law to the new court of appeal in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. I understand that if the new Chief Justice says that only one judge should handle that, that will be the case. I understand that people can also go to the Family Court, and that the Chief Judge can also order that a single justice hear the application.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3553
Special provisions in the bill mean that the bankruptcy trustee will be obliged to take into account divorce proceedings. I will be very interested to see what that means for partners who often bring themselves to the point of bankruptcy or declare bankruptcy to thwart the other partner’s ability to gain access to their assets. In a very short time I have discussed the main issues in this bill. As I said, if this bill is not passed in July, a difficulty will arise because a different regime will be operating. At page 5 of the Attorney General’s second reading speech he states - Child support: Members will be aware that unlike other states this state has not referred state powers to the commonwealth Parliament in relation to child support legislation. Rather, this Parliament has adopted commonwealth legislation relating to child support provisions concerning exnuptial children that are based on powers referred by other states. He states further on - Currently, in the commonwealth Parliament there are further amendments to the commonwealth child support legislation. If and when those amendments are enacted by that Parliament, the state government will be in a position to consider whether those amendments should also be adopted by this state Parliament. This bill will place de facto partners and exnuptial children in the same position as married persons and children of those marriages. I understand that the commonwealth amendments, particularly those relating to shared parental responsibility, are proposed to commence on 1 July 2006. Therefore, if the provisions of this bill do not commence until after 1 July 2006, for a time there will be a significant difference between the law applicable to married persons and their children and the law applicable to de facto partners and their children. Of course, that would be regrettable. However, as the commonwealth Parliament has not yet enacted its parental responsibility legislation - although it is anticipated any day - and this bill must reflect enacted commonwealth legislation, this difference in applicable laws will be unavoidable. In this context, it would, of course, be of assistance if this Parliament were able to consider and enact the bill without undue delay. Could the Attorney General have introduced this bill sooner? Mr J.A. McGinty: No. Ms S.E. WALKER: Why not? Mr J.A. McGinty: Because it incorporates the most recent changes to the federal legislation. They are proclaimed to come into effect on 1 July. They have only just been finalised at the federal level. Ms S.E. WALKER: What does the Attorney General mean by finalised? Mr J.A. McGinty: I mean passed. Ms S.E. WALKER: The Attorney General has known that that legislation has been necessary for some time, has he not? Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes, but the precise drafting was not finalised until recently. Ms S.E. WALKER: When was it first passed by the House of Representatives? The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr A.P. O’Gorman): I remind the member for Nedlands that this is her opportunity to debate the second reading of the bill. She will have an opportunity to ask questions during consideration in detail. Ms S.E. WALKER: The Attorney General does not mind my asking him. The ACTING SPEAKER: The consideration in detail stage is for asking questions. Mr A.D. McRae: Make a speech. Ms S.E. WALKER: I am waiting for the Attorney General to tell me. He will tell me. Mr J.A. McGinty: The answer to the question is that on 30 March, which is two and a bit months ago, the legislation passed the Senate with amendments. As recently as two months ago the legislation was passed by the commonwealth Parliament. We needed to ensure its consistency. As soon as it was passed by the commonwealth Parliament the appropriate drafting was done so that it could be presented to state cabinet and introduced into Parliament as quickly as possible. Ms S.E. WALKER: If this bill is not passed by the upper house by 1 July 2006, which it will not be - Mr J.A. McGinty: Won’t it? Ms S.E. WALKER: How can it be? It must be examined by the Standing Committee on Uniform Legislation and Statutes Review. Mr J.A. McGinty: I am sure that if goodwill is shown in the upper house -
3554 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Ms S.E. WALKER: The bill is 263 pages long and the Attorney General has placed several pages of amendments on the notice paper that must be examined. I mean, really, does he not think it might be asking a little too much? Mr J.A. McGinty: I don’t because it is important legislation to pass to ensure that all children in particular are treated fairly. Ms S.E. WALKER: Perhaps the Attorney General could have acted more quickly, but there we go. This is major commonwealth legislation; it is great legislation, albeit long overdue. In this state, counselling services should be provided in the Family Violence Court for people who are the subject of restraining orders and who are very angry and up tight. I do not know whether it is in the pipeline. A counselling service for those people has been suggested to me by some lawyers who attend court in connection with restraining orders and see the anger, particularly in men, over these issues. With this uniform legislation, the federal government is seeking to diffuse situations. It is offering a form of support to couples and their children who are coming to terms with separation and facing the attendant emotional problems. It is excellent legislation and it is wonderful that those provisions have been introduced. I hope they come to fruition. I understood that there was a centre at Joondalup, but the member for Joondalup, who should know, tells me there is not. I will not go through all the commonwealth acts that are incorporated into this bill, but I will do so during the consideration in detail stage. What we decide in this place might be different once the upper house committee has examined this legislation. It is not state-initiated legislation; it is federal legislation that will be uniform across the whole of Australia. The opposition supports the bill. DR S.C. THOMAS (Capel) [8.58 pm]: We have heard a fair amount about the legal aspects of this bill and I would like to give a human perspective to the debate. This bill originated in the federal Parliament, in Canberra, as a result of agitation from a large number of groups, including men’s rights groups. A federal parliamentary committee was formed to examine the functioning of both the entire Family Court system and the Child Support Agency. I put on record that I contributed to that committee’s work and read its report fairly thoroughly. I considered it to be a relatively good report. However, it failed to meet many of the demands of many of the special interest groups that were instrumental in the formation of the committee. Many of those groups were probably upset that the reforms they proposed were not taken far enough. However, I consider that the reforms that were ultimately proposed at least sought to repair some of the issues that face the Family Court and the whole issue of family breakdown and child support, which is a very thorny issue. I will consider some of the practicalities and outcomes of this legislation. Of course, for the most part, it attempts to make mediation a more active part of the family breakdown process. That is a very good and worthy cause. We would all like more people to go into the mediation process, rather than spend $30 000, $40 000 or $50 000 on legal fees in the Family Court and end up with a decision that leaves them slightly, if not very, unhappy. It is very good to provide more counselling and the earlier that we can intercede in the process, the better. It also has a number of pitfalls, and I will discuss some of them. In doing so, I recognise that I do not have all the answers to some of the issues that I am about to raise. It is a very difficult and thorny personal issue. If there were simple answers, I suspect that we would all be following them, the person who thought of them would be a hero and we would no longer have a problem. This legislation has some shortfalls in terms of families splitting up. Unfortunately, like so many other court systems, no matter how we change the system, it will still be an adversarial system. That is the problem. The prime example is two people going into mediation. Generally, two people with relatively goodwill will go in at different levels. Very rarely do the two parents who split up have the same view of how high the court will rank their parenting ability and, therefore, how likely they are to succeed in their court action. Unfortunately, because of that, a great range of legal practitioners become involved in these cases. I will mention a Family Court lawyer who does a very good job of promoting the negotiation phase. Peter Cole, who worked in the south west, was excellent at trying to get negotiated outcomes between parties going through the splitting-up phase. Some legal practitioners are probably not as effective in that process as Peter Cole. The first thing that most legal practitioners would do, as would doctors or anyone else, is ensure that they do no harm and do not weaken their case. People who go before the Family Court attend counselling sessions; for the most part, it is mandatory. Legal practitioners can argue and fight as much as possible, but they are not required to make any credible effort to reach an agreement. Under the current system, the court never hears what was actually said. However, from now on it will be heard. The difficult negotiations will probably take place before that. There is a double-edged sword when this sort of system is put in place. That negotiation can take place in a spirit of goodwill, but if the parties involved negotiate away anything, they will open the door to negotiate away more things. People are in a position of strength. They have the high moral ground. They do not necessarily have to give anything away, and why would they? If a legal practitioner’s client has the stronger case, even though there might be a negotiable point, would he advise his client to weaken the case? I acknowledge that occasionally legal practitioners will do that. I will not name the legal practitioners who have been in that situation and have not done that or will not do that. There will still be an adversarial situation at the end of the process. It is a difficult time for people; it is an
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3555 emotional time. People want to know what their rights are. Would legal practitioners advise people to give away more than they need to? Of course they would not. That is a shortfall in this legislation. As I said before, I do not necessarily have the answer to this problem, because I do not think there is an easy fix. In the negotiation process, the person in the weaker position will put forward a middle-line position and the person in the stronger position, who will have a good lawyer, will be advised not to weaken his or her case. The person in a position of strength is most likely to get what he or she wants. I commend the Attorney General on the briefing; it was very good. The people at the briefing on Monday were excellent. Even they had to acknowledge that in some cases the process will not get to an easy level. One of the problems is that this legislation relates to something that to a large degree is not delivered by this government, so this is not an opportunity to bag the government. At a federal level it will raise some high hopes. It will occasionally make a difference. In all truth, I would love to be proved wrong. I would love someone to tell me in five years that, in all those relatively even cases in which the judge had to make a decision because each person went for his or her bit, the issues were fixed because the people went to counselling first. I would love that to be the outcome, but I do not think it will be. There will be an occasional case in which that will happen; an occasional case will be negotiated. The winners in the Family Court process are the 50 per cent of couples who manage to negotiate outside any legislation and without any counselling on the best way to co-parent. Many couples do that. Sometimes they find very imaginative ways to make it work. Occasionally there are functioning 50-50 splits. One of the demands from the men’s groups that pushed for the inquiry that resulted in this legislation was the presupposition of a 50-50 split. Obviously, that means the child spending equal time with each of the parents. There are occasions on which that works. Two parents might live relatively close to each other in very similar housing structures, so that their child can go to one school. I can give examples of when that works, but it will never work as a rule; we cannot do that to kids. Men’s rights groups are very difficult. If you were to go through a divorce, Mr Acting Speaker, and you joined one of the men’s rights groups, I suspect that you would be scarred for life and would never get a serious hearing again. I suspect that it is difficult for men who are going through a divorce to find a coherent group to work with. Some of the men’s rights groups are a bit way out there, so to speak. That is not an acceptable philosophy for most men. Some men’s groups are starting to form, and I can recommend some very good ones. I recommend the Mates Mens Support Group in Busselton, should any member want to speak to somebody who can give very good advice. Much better groups are available now. The 50-50 parenting system will not work because it is not practical. There have been some changes in the Family Court system. Unfortunately, most of them have involved changes of nomenclature. Although the legislation for the Family Court can be changed, it is very difficult to change the practical outcomes. Governments across Australia have not done that very well. It is very difficult to do, and I acknowledge that. Six or seven years ago the nomenclature was changed so that the term “custody” was no longer used. “Custody” was deemed a bad word. It obviously brought out very negative emotions. There was a custodial parent and a non-custodial parent; there was an empowered parent and a disempowered parent. The nomenclature was very confronting. At that stage, we could potentially have addressed some of the issues of empowerment and disempowerment, but that was not done. We changed the nomenclature because it was easier. It was very hard to address empowerment versus disempowerment. It was much easier to change the nomenclature and say that residency will be granted, not custody. Parents have joint custody, so they are supposed to coordinate and talk about the joint decisions that they make in raising their child, but the child will generally live with one person. I accept that in most circumstances the child will need to live 60 to 80 per cent of the time with the parent who will undertake the majority of the child rearing. In effect, the name is “custody” and I prefer that we use custody. A non-custodial parent may be permitted to move 500 kilometres away from the child. However, that person has joint custody and is able to make joint parenting decisions. The custodial parent, in this case the resident parent, will make the decisions. The non-custodial parent is stuck in that situation. In effect, we have a custodial and non-custodial parent, but those terms were changed to residency and non-residency parent, which is much nicer. However, the real issues have not been addressed. There is no easy answer to that. It is almost impossible to empower the non-custodial parent and maintain a quality of life for the child. It is a disappointment to a lot of people that although the nomenclature has been changed, the functioning of the court has not changed. I should have said at the commencement of my speech that I have had dealings with the Family Court and the Child Support Agency. In the years that I have dealt with the Child Support Agency, it has been nothing less than exemplary, apart from one incident that involved a phone call. The officers of the agency have always been polite and considerate. In my opinion it is not a bad agency. I recognise that there are problems with non- residency parents who do not understand or get involved in the system and probably do not have the financial wherewithal to seek advice, because it is expensive. I recognise that some people probably have not used that system properly. The Child Support Agency functions fairly well. There are exceptions and there are exceptions in my electorate for both custodial and non-custodial parents. There are as many derelict non-custodial parents as there are custodial parents doing the wrong thing by trying to interfere in the relationship between the child
3556 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] and the other parent. Both sides represent a parent doing the wrong thing and both sides represent a parent doing the right thing. This legislation provides the opportunity to identify some of the problems. If a parent works with the Child Support Agency, it will do all it can to assist that parent. Like all compromises, everyone walks away slightly unhappy. I have found it to be a good and productive unit. It has much to commend it, but unfortunately it ends up as the bogeyman. It has a terrible reputation that is undeserved, and that is a shame. I refer now to the bill, which will improve the way the courts function. The proposed extended powers that will be given to magistrates is a positive move. If nothing else, the delays that are currently experienced in getting one’s case before the court may be addressed. I am concerned about the provision that deals with appealing a magistrate’s decision. At the moment, if a person wants to appeal a magistrate’s decision, he or she can lodge that appeal with a judge of the Family Court. It will go to a full appeal court of the Family Court. Although that is a positive move in the functioning of the court, it will make things more difficult for those people who are poorly prepared for their court case. I suspect members on both sides of Parliament will recognise that many people who turn up to the Family Court are not in a financial position to obtain legal advice. It is an expensive process to get the court’s decision. Many people turn up to the courts without the financial wherewithal to actually achieve justice. Currently, the magistrate will look at the case and often will deny a decision and correct some of the information and then the matter goes to the judge. It almost gives them a second bite of the cherry. I recognise that the court would like to streamline that process by removing the second bite of the cherry. It needs to make sure that that safety net is re-established. If it is not, more people will start to slip through the cracks. [Member’s time extended.] Dr S.C. THOMAS: It is a fall-back position, which I accept will be removed by this bill. However, further work needs to be done in this area. Currently a parent seeks a legal representative, assuming he or she can afford one. The court will generally say that they need to seek counselling. As I said earlier, for the most part, people whose cases get to the court will look at their strengths. Members should remember that about 50 per cent of cases are determined before they get to court because both parties attempt to do the right thing. These people are the winners in this process. However, there is the extreme end in which there is domestic violence, child abuse, drug abuse and alcohol abuse; in other words, a problem in the family home and parenting has become an issue. To a large degree, the Family Court deals with the horror cases. In the middle is a whole group of people who are trying to get the best relationship they can with their children and are in an adversarial position. They go to counselling and they are asked what they are willing to concede. I will give members some advice, and it was very good advice that I did not take for some time. If I had taken that advice earlier, life for me would have been different. Following a marriage breakdown, a man tends to remain the breadwinner and the woman takes on the nurturing role. It was said to me that if a man can swallow his pride and move away from the breadwinning role into the nurturing role, the Family Court is almost required to reward him for it. I have given advice along these lines and the result is that two people who previously had been working and raising a child end up racing each other to get onto welfare. The person on welfare is designated as family caregiver and he or she is in a powerful position. I can give examples of where that system has worked for men and they have won Family Court cases. If both the man and woman become the caregiver, the Family Court, in an attempt to make sure it is not gender biased, quite often designates the man as the caregiver. If men were smarter about this process, more men would get custody of their child or children. There is a race to get on welfare and men do not do that well. We are full of pride and we tend to be strong about the situation and immerse ourselves in our work. I did not understand the advice that I was given at the time. However, I have since passed it on to some people who have understood it. Those people who have used my advice get a good run out of the Family Court. This legislation will not change the race to welfare by making sure one is in the best position to be successful in the Family Court. Unfortunately, there is no easy answer to that. Even this legislation is predicated on the greatest benefit for the child. That becomes a very difficult prospect when we start to talk about what will be the greatest benefit for the child. When people go to the Family Court, they must be told that parents in the Family Court have absolutely no rights. That is very difficult for people to understand, because parents have rights before they get to the Family Court. Parents have a say in where their children go to school and whether or not they can stay up late. People must understand that in the Family Court they have no rights left. Neither parent has any rights at that stage. There is the ubiquitous welfare of the child, and that becomes very difficult to determine. A person could obtain a verbal opinion that a child would be better off living in one house with one parent, with the other parent removed completely and having no contact at all with the child. People believe that. Other people believe that the child should spend as much time as possible with the non-custodial parent. However, finding where the balance is in terms of what is best for the child is very difficult. In the end, it is not the determining factor, although the Family Court will say that it is. In the end, the determining factor is the best situation which the Family Court can work with and which does the least damage to the child. There is a big difference. For the most part, there is no advantage to the child if a parent is able to take that child around the
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3557 world. Up to about 10 years ago, the Family Court would have prevented and blocked that happening. I believe it was at the direction of the then head of the Family Court, Judge Alastair Nicholson, that that changed. The court decided that it did not really matter where people moved in the world, it was okay. It still amazes me that somebody might actually contend that it is in the best interests of the child to be taken to the other side of the world; for example, to move to England. I cannot see any logical reason that it would be. Obviously, the best interests of the child are not necessarily paramount; it is the best compromise that the court can make. I accept that we must have the best compromise that the court can make, because there cannot be hard and fast rules in this legislation. The Minister for Health does not sound very healthy. Mr J.A. McGinty: No, I have been better. Dr S.C. THOMAS: As a veterinarian who is still registered, I am prepared to give the minister a once-over, if necessary. Mr J.A. McGinty: I think a lot of your colleagues would agree with your diagnosis, too. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr M.J. Cowper): Minister, do not take up the offer. Dr S.C. THOMAS: We are talking about the best interests of the child. It cannot be in the best interests of the child to have that sort of separation. I actually met with Philip Ruddock, the federal Attorney-General, to discuss this issue, after I provided a submission on the report. I must say that the answer, in my opinion, was pathetic. Although there are some good things in this legislation, obviously some matters are just too hard to be addressed in the end. It may be too hard for us at any stage. I am not suggesting that the Attorney General has come up with something that will answer the questions and deal with the problems, because I do not think that he can. I certainly do not have the answers, and I do not think it is particularly easy. However, I say to the Attorney General that I would like recognition of some of the difficulties that are still left in this legislation. That is a prime one. Unfortunately, in my family law case, the judge - I will not name him - effectively said, “We have here a situation in which there are two good parents, so it does not really matter where the child goes; I can sleep well at night.” Although I just ignored it at the time, I suggest that that is an example of the attitude faced by some of the people who go to the Family Court. I am not talking about the really difficult cases. This legislation does some very good things in those cases in which abuse is suspected or even proved. Of course, none of us would propose that children be left in any form of abusive home. Certainly, in those cases, the best interests of the child are absolutely obvious. There is no way that anyone would suggest anything different. However, in those cases in which there is a relatively even, shall I say, degree of parenting, it makes the decision very difficult. We can see why non-custodial parents of both genders walk away from this process; it is because it becomes too hard. If people think it is a case of only men walking away from the process, they are wrong. Many women also decide that the process is too hard. Maybe they have come up against men who have read the advice about getting on welfare first, and have a very strong case. However, in both those cases many of these people walk away because it becomes too difficult. They do that because they are completely disempowered by the process. Although this is a good process, it does not empower either side in the end. That is probably the ultimate failing of the family law system; it disempowers all the adults in the process. Grandparents effectively have no rights. I guess it is very difficult to argue that grandparents should have much in the way of access rights. If we cannot get the system right for custodial and non-custodial parents, grandparents must wait in the wings. That is fair enough. It is very sad in many cases, but it is probably fair enough. However, this legislation does not address the empowerment of parents of either gender. Parents of both genders are being damaged by the system. It is an imperfect system and will remain an imperfect system. If I had the answers, I would have written them down, sold them and been a millionaire, and we could have all gone home an hour earlier. Obviously, I do not have the answers. I do not think that anybody necessarily does. One of the first things that I would like us to do is acknowledge the difficulties, the damage and the problems that still exist in the system. One of the first things to do with people who are disempowered is to acknowledge that they are disempowered. Although the Family Court has made improvements in some areas, it is still an absolute failure in that regard. Under the rule of the previous head of the Family Court, the court found itself defending its position in an adversarial manner. It did so because it was not able to acknowledge that it is an imperfect system. At some stage I would like the court system to acknowledge that the best interests of the child must be metered by the best way that we can manage that. The situation is the same with community development. The best interests of the child must be metered to a point at which we can manage the process. It is not always out-and-out the best interests of the child. If we could acknowledge the shortcomings as well as the good things in all the legislation affecting the Family Court, acknowledge that we disempower people in this process and apologise for the fact that we cannot empower them but that we are doing the best that we possibly can, and take that forward, I believe that we might get a lot closer to some middle ground. I believe there would be some real benefits in that. I am ashamed that the federal government and the Federal Court are unable to do that. Perhaps the state of Western Australia could go some way towards achieving it.
3558 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
MR J.A. McGINTY (Fremantle - Attorney General) [9.18 pm]: I thank the member for Nedlands and the member for Capel for their contributions to this debate. I will touch on one or two issues that I believe are important. The Family Legislation Amendment Bill 2006 is rushed for a very good reason, and that is that the Australian Parliament, as late as 30 March this year, amended the federal Family Law Act. In anticipation of the passage of that amendment, we had prepared a number of drafts. In fact, at the time of passage through the Senate, we were on to the fifth draft of the bill in anticipation of what we understood would go through the federal Parliament. In fact, on 14 February, the fifth draft of the Family Legislation Amendment Bill was prepared. It was not until 30 March 2006 that the bill finally passed the Senate. We then moved as quickly as we could to bring this bill into the house. The Chief Judge of the Family Court wrote to me expressing his concerns about this bill not passing through the Parliament. He referred to the disadvantages that will be experienced, particularly by exnuptial children in Western Australia. It is my hope that the Legislative Council will appreciate the need to pass this bill and that it will truncate its procedures in order to deal with it, given that this bill, as the members for Capel and Nedlands said, with all of its imperfections, does not have the answer to every problem that exists in this area, but is nonetheless the best thinking from the commonwealth Parliament on how to address these issues. This bill does nothing more than to reflect the provisions that have been enacted by the commonwealth Parliament. Because Western Australia is the only state in Australia that has its own Family Court, it is unique in that Western Australian legislation needs to mirror the commonwealth provisions. Therefore, this legislation simply picks up what the commonwealth has already done. Ms S.E. Walker: What happens if the committee of the Council decides that it does not like aspects of it? Even if it changes the legislation, can that be overridden by the commonwealth? Mr J.A. McGINTY: No. We would then end up with commonwealth law applying to marriages, and Western Australian law, as amended by the upper house, which might well be different, applying to de facto relationships, which I think is highly undesirable. From a policy perspective, it is desirable to get complete harmony in the way the Family Court treats all relationships. Ms S.E. Walker: A better way to look at it is that married and de facto couples can access the court for property and child disputes. Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes. Ms S.E. Walker: That does not seem to get people’s backs up so much when you say it that way; do you know what I mean? That is what it is about, isn’t it? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Exactly. Ms S.E. Walker: It is just enabling them to access that court to have their problems resolved. Mr J.A. McGINTY: In doing that, there should not be one set of rules for de factos and one set for married couples because the problems are the same and the status is irrelevant to the determination of the interests that exist. That is why I hope the Legislative Council will see the legislation as important and see fit to pass it, knowing full well that it has been subject to a major national debate, and that the legislation is now applicable in every other state and applicable in Western Australia in respect of marriages, although we might prefer it to be done differently in Western Australia. That is the reason that I am very keen to have it transmitted from this house to the Legislative Council, and read into the Legislative Council this week. A range of issues have been raised by members during the debate, to which my answer is that although, philosophically, I might have done things marginally differently, uniformity is important and we should extend the national provisions to exnuptial relationships in Western Australia. Having said that, there are a number of drafting amendments on the notice paper standing in my name. It is my intention, when the bill is second read, to move that the bill be printed pro forma so that we can incorporate those amendments which will facilitate the consideration in detail, because in my view there will be no need for any further amendments and the bill can then be transmitted to the Legislative Council. The intention, therefore, is to resume debate on this bill on Thursday morning and then transmit it to the Legislative Council on Thursday, which still leaves a little over two full weeks for the Legislative Council to give consideration to the bill if it can fit it into its timeframe. With those comments, I again thank members for their contributions and their support of this legislation. Question put and passed. Bill read a second time. Pro Forma Amendments On motion by Mr J.A. McGinty (Attorney General), resolved - That in relation to the Family Legislation Amendment Bill 2006, the amendments listed on the notice paper standing in the name of the Attorney General be made pro forma. Amendments agreed to pursuant to the foregoing resolution -
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3559
Clause 36 Page 38, lines 12 and 13 - To delete “instituted under Part 5A” and substitute - that concern property of a total value exceeding the ceiling amount Page 38, lines 14 to 16 - To delete the lines. Page 38, lines 21 and 22 - To delete the lines. Clause 37 Page 39, lines 1 to 28 and page 40, lines 1 to 7 - To oppose the clause. Clause 43 Page 47, line 17 - To delete “court” and substitute - Court Clause 106 Page 139, line 9 - To insert before “This” - Subject to section 202H, Page 144, after line 12 - To insert - “child-related proceedings” includes proceedings that are child-related proceedings within the meaning of the Family Law Act; Page 144, line 26 - To insert after “proceedings” - , as defined in section 202H(6) Clause 108 Page 149, line 2 - To delete “Part” and substitute - Division Clause 116 Page 167, lines 6 and 7 - To delete “nominated by the executive manager of that court”. Page 168, line 28 - To insert before “de facto partners” - parents or Page 168, line 29 - To delete “de facto”. Page 169, line 3 - To delete “between the partners”. Page 169, line 5 - To insert before “people affected” - parents or Page 169, line 12 - To insert before “people affected” - parents or Clause 171 Page 224, lines 25 to 27 - To delete the lines. Page 224, after line 31 - To insert - (FLA s. 4(1)) Page 225, line 11 -To delete “(FLA s. 4(1))”. Page 225, line 14 - To insert after “organisation” - within the meaning of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 Page 226, line 4 - To delete “(FLA s. 4(1))”. Page 226, line 6 - To insert after “organisation” - within the meaning of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 Page 226, line 7 - To insert before “an organisation” - such Page 226, line 10 - To delete “(FLA s. 4(1))”.
3560 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Clause 197 Page 258, after line 9 - To insert - (ii) the Child Support Legislation Amendment (Reform of the Child Support Scheme — Initial Measures) Act 2006; and Page 258, after line 22 - To insert - (ii) the Child Support Legislation Amendment (Reform of the Child Support Scheme — Initial Measures) Act 2006; and
House adjourned at 9.25 pm ______
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3561
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Questions and answers are as supplied to Hansard.
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES - EX GRATIA OR SIMILAR PAYMENTS 626. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Premier; Minister for Public Sector Management; State Development; Federal Affairs Will the Minister please inform the House as to any ex gratia or similar payments made by any agencies or departments since February 2001 under the Minister’s portfolio responsibilities, including: (1) The name of the person receiving the payment? (2) The amount of the payment? (3) The reasons for the payment? (4) The processes undertaken between the application, or proposal, for such a payment to be made, and the making of that payment? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises: (1)-(4) The Department of the Premier and Cabinet's accounting records indicate that no ex-gratia or similar payments have been made since February 2001. Governor's Establishment; The Office of the Public Sector Standards Commissioner advises: (1)-(4) Not applicable Department of Industry and Resources advises: Date Name Amount ($) Reason Process 22/6/01 NELSON TC 164.80 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs P45/2388s & 2396s Minister approves 19/9/01 CROESUS MINING NL 824.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs E16/270 Minister approves 05/11/01 FREEHILLS 480.00 KOS:RV ex gratia payment Applicant requests - (LAWYERS) Minister approves 30/11/01 JONES R 113.40 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs P45/2435 Minister approves 31/5/02 DELTA GOLD 824.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - EXPLORATION costs E69/1648 Minister approves PTY LTD 10/9/02 GIRALIA 824.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES NL costs E69/1570 Minister approves 01/12/02 RUTTER JH 82.40 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs P74/237 Minister approves 31/1/03 CREW RF & 625.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - KASARSKIS J costs P40/1100-1103 Minister approves 28/04/03 GIANNI PETER R 800.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs E27/303 Minister approves 08/05/03 WESTERN RESOURCES 1150.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - & EXPLORATION costs E04/1388 Minister approves PTY LTD 30/12/03 COMET 910.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES LTD costs E70/2602 Minister approves 30/12/03 ASKINS PW & 800.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - STEWART JI costs E70/2571 Minister approves 25/10/04 WESTERN RESOURCES 700.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - & EXPLORATION costs P15/4591 Minister approves PTY LTD
3562 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
03/11/04 ASHBURTON 1485.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - GOLD MINES NL costs E08/930 Minister approves 07/12/04 ROJEX MINING 896.80 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - SERVICES PTY LTD costs E70/2687 Minister approves 18/4/05 JINDALEE 50.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES LTD costs E80/3431 Minister approves 31/7/05 GOLDHOUR PTY LTD 1310.50 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - costs E74/325 Minister approves 24/10/05 JINDALEE 820.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES LTD costs E63/965 Minister approves 04/1/06 GLOBE URANIUM LTD 840.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs E08/1558 Minister approves 24/1/06 OCHRE 1532.50 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES LTD costs P63/1312 Minister approves TOTAL 15232.40
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES - EX GRATIA OR SIMILAR PAYMENTS 636. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation Will the Minister please inform the House as to any ex gratia or similar payments made by any agencies or departments since February 2001 under the Minister’s portfolio responsibilities, including: (1) The name of the person receiving the payment? (2) The amount of the payment? (3) The reasons for the payment? (4) The processes undertaken between the application, or proposal, for such a payment to be made, and the making of that payment? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation has provided the following response: Department of Industry & Resources: (1)-(4) Nil. Office of Energy: (1) (a) Mr John Kelly. (b) Colortype Press. (2) (a) $1 779.80. (b) $3 639.90. (3) (a) Reimbursement of costs associated with the cancellation of a holiday booking. (b) Payment for work performed for the Office of Energy. (4) (a) Mr Kelly was initially appointed as a member of the Electricity Reform Task Force (ERTF) for a period of twelve months concluding 15 August 2002 in keeping with the ERTF's original Terms of Reference. The ERTF Report was delayed and Mr Kelly was requested to consider cancelling a September holiday he had pre-booked in April. Given the critical stage of the ERTF's work, it was very important that Mr Kelly remain available during September 2002 to perform his work as a member. To ensure that Mr Kelly was not financially disadvantaged by the request for him to be available in September 2002, Ministerial approval was granted for an act of grace payment to Mr Kelly for the non-refundable cost associated with his holiday. (b) A change in ownership and bank account details were not communicated to the Office of Energy by the new owners of Colortype Press prior to payment being made into the bank account of the previous owner. The new owners of Colortype Press subsequently sought payment from the Office of Energy. Considerable effort was made by the Office staff to obtain repayment from the administrators
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3563
acting for the previous owners of Colortype Press without success. Advice was sought by the Office from the State Solicitor's Office and the Office of Auditor General on this matter. Following further representation by the new owners of Colortype Press, Ministerial approval for an act of grace payment of $3 639.90 was granted.
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES - EX GRATIA OR SIMILAR PAYMENTS 637. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development; Employment Protection; Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern Will the Minister please inform the House as to any ex gratia or similar payments made by any agencies or departments since February 2001 under the Minister’s portfolio responsibilities, including: (1) The name of the person receiving the payment? (2) The amount of the payment? (3) The reasons for the payment? (4) The processes undertaken between the application, or proposal, for such a payment to be made, and the making of that payment? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: Department of Industry and Resources advises: Date Name Amount ($) Reason Process 22/6/01 NELSON TC 164.80 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs Minister approves 19/9/01 CROESUS MINING NL 824.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs Minister approves 05/11/01 FREEHILLS 480.00 KOS:RV ex gratia payment Applicant requests - (LAWYERS) Minister approves 30/11/01 JONES R 113.40 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs Minister approves 31/5/02 DELTA GOLD 824.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - EXPLORATION costs Minister approves PTY LTD 10/9/02 GIRALIA 824.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES NL costs Minister approves 01/12/02 RUTTER JH 82.40 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs Minister approves 31/1/03 CREW RF & 625.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - KASARSKIS J costs Minister approves 28/04/03 GIANNI PETER R 800.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs Minister approves 08/05/03 WESTERN RESOURCES 1150.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - & EXPLORATION costs Minister approves PTY LTD 30/12/03 COMET 910.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES LTD costs Minister approves 30/12/03 ASKINS PW & 800.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - STEWART JI costs Minister approves 25/10/04 WESTERN RESOURCES 700.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - & EXPLORATION costs Minister approves PTY LTD 03/11/04 ASHBURTON 1485.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - GOLD MINES NL costs Minister approves 07/12/04 ROJEX MINING SERVICES PTY LTD 896.80 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs Minister approves
3564 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
18/4/05 JINDALEE 50.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES LTD costs Minister approves 31/7/05 GOLDHOUR PTY LTD 1310.50 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - costs Minister approves 24/10/05 JINDALEE 820.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES LTD costs Minister approves 04/1/06 GLOBE URANIUM LTD 840.00 Ex-gratia refund of fees/associated Applicant requests - costs Minister approves 24/1/06 OCHRE 1532.50 Ex-gratia refund of fees/ associated Applicant requests - RESOURCES LTD costs Minister approves TOTAL 15232.40 The Employment Division of the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection has made no ex gratia or similar payments since February 2001. WorkCover WA advises it has not made any ex gratia or similar payments since February 2001. (1)-(4) Not applicable Department of the Registrar, WA Industrial Relations Commission advises: (1) Nil (2)-(4) Not applicable Construction Industry Long Service Leave Payments Board advises: (1) None (2)-(4) N/A Goldfields-Esperance Development Commission advises: (1)-(4) Nil The Great Southern Development Commission advises it has not made any ex gratia, or similar payments since February 2001. (1)-(4) Not applicable
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES - EX GRATIA OR SIMILAR PAYMENTS 638. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services; Justice; Community Safety Will the Minister please inform the House as to any ex gratia or similar payments made by any agencies or departments since February 2001 under the Minister’s portfolio responsibilities, including: (1) The name of the person receiving the payment? (2) The amount of the payment? (3) The reasons for the payment? (4) The processes undertaken between the application, or proposal, for such a payment to be made, and the making of that payment? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: THE OFFICE OF CRIME PREVENTION The Office of Crime Prevention advise as follows (1)-(4) Not Applicable THE OFFICE OF ROAD SAFETY The Office of Road Safety advise as follows (1)-(4) Not Applicable OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR OF CUSTODIAL SERVICES The Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services advise as follows (1)-(4) Not Applicable
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3565
FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES AUTHORITY (FESA) The Fire and Emergency Services Authority (FESA) advise since 2001 the following "ex gratia or similar" payments have been made: A. (1) Paid to the Estate of the late James Martin Regan. (2) Amount paid $184,322.00 (3) Compensation paid to Mr Regan's estate. Mr Regan died on 2 April 2 2004 while performing duties as a volunteer for the State Emergency Service. (4) Ex-gratia amount paid in accordance with a Cabinet Decision dated 11 March 1996, which approved the provision of "top up benefits by way of ex-gratia payments to volunteers (including SES volunteers)... equivalent to that offered to Bush Fire Brigade members under the Bush Fires Act 1954." B. (1) Paid to the Estate of the late Mr CW Baldock. (2) Amount paid $2,106.00 (3) FESA paid for 50% of the "shortfall" of the Volunteer Bush Firefighter's funeral expenses. (4) Payment was made on moral grounds, in line with Treasurer's Instruction 319, "Act of Grace Payments", following a request from Mr Baldock's widow. C. (1) Paid to Mr C Chandler. (2) Amount paid $1,650.00 (3) Compensation for damage to Mr Chandler's motor vehicle. (4) Payment was made on moral grounds, in line with Treasurer's Instruction 319, "Act of Grace Payments", following a request from Mr Chandler, whose motor vehicle was mistakenly donated to FESA and subsequently damaged during road rescue training. D. (1) Paid to Mr K Reeve. (2) Amount paid $2,000.00 (3) Payment made to resolve discrimination claim made by the Firefighter Applicant against FESA. (4) Payment made in accordance with an agreement made at a Conciliation Conference at the Equal Opportunity Commission on 15 January 2005. THE WESTERN AUSTRALIA POLICE The Western Australia Police advise they do not have computerised records prior to 2004. To obtain information prior to this date would take inordinate resources to manually search for this data and the Commissioner of Police is not prepared to commit the resources to this task. (1) Applicants for an ex gratia or act of grace payment routinely provide detailed information, whether it be personal, medical or financial, in support of their claim. In the circumstances, WA Police believe it would be an infringement of the applicant's privacy to provide their names. (2)-(3) Police records show 6 payments made since 2004. The amounts and reasons are as follows: 1. $522.85 For damages caused by police in the course of duty. 2. $10,000 For damages caused by police in the course of duty. 3. $200 Compensation for loss of item. 4. $291.20 For damages caused by police in the course of duty. 5. $190,393 Death and disability. 6. $240,000 Royal Commission expenses. (4) Payments are made in accordance with Treasurer's Instruction 319 which details the processes involved and makes reference to relevant provisions in the Financial Administration and Audit Act 1985.
3566 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIVE SERVICES The Department of Corrective Services (formerly the Department of Justice) advise the following ex gratia payments have been made: (1)-(3) Name of the person receiving payment Amount of Reason for payment payment Prisoner 1: (Confidential) $160.00 Loss of income due to administrative error while on home detention. GroupWorker: Smedley, Kevin $199.00 Damage to watch during course of duties. Group Worker: Dodsworth, Neil $293.95 Damage to watch during course of duties. Prisoner 2: (Confidential) $250.00 Loss of property Prisoner 3: (Confidential) $255.00 Loss of property Community Worker: Richard Lane $150.00 Damage to vehicle window while attending late night meeting. Crisp & Ilberys $33,658.30 Costs for defending Prison Officers & Superintendents in relation to legal action by Prisoners arising from prison riot. Prisoner 4: (Confidential) $139.60 Loss of property Prison Officer: Lloyd Delbridge $124.19 For damage to vehicle from falling tree branch. Prisoner 5: (Confidential) $1100.00 Damage to property $36,330.04 Total Payments since February 2002 (4) The Department of Corrective Services process for ex gratia payments is contained in the procedure document, an extract of which is included below; This procedure takes effect upon receipt of a claim for an ex gratia payment. Business Manager 1. Receive request for an ex gratia payment including name and address of recipient, comprehensive description of event and amount of claim 2. Investigate claim 3. Forward approval for claims less than $500 and completed payment voucher to Manager Financial Accounting 4. If greater than $500.00 then forward original request to Executive Director for approval to pay. If less than $500.00 proceed to step 7 Executive Director 5. Forward approved request to Manager Financial Accounting with completed payment voucher Manager Budget and Planning 6. Forward approved request from Cabinet or Ministers to Manager Financial Accounting with completed payment voucher. Manager Financial Accounting 7. Register payment in Ex gratia payment register 8. Forward payment voucher to Certifying Officer for payment Certifying Officer 9. Process payment voucher GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF ENGAGED IN COMMUNICATIONS, MARKETING, SPEECH WRITING OR MEDIA 696. Mr M.J. Birney to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development representing the Minister for Fisheries For each department and agency under the Minister’s control, including the Minister’s Office, will the Minister please advise the following -
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3567
(1) How many employees (head count) are engaged in communications, marketing, speech writing or media (including public, corporate and media relations)? (2) What is the salary band for each of these employees? (3) What is the job title for each of these employees? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: For the Minister's Office (1) 1 (2) Level 7 (3) Media Adviser For the Department of Fisheries WA (1) 12 (2) Salary bands are as follows: a. Level 8 x 1 b. Level 7 x 1 c. Level 6 x 1 d. Level 5 x 1 e. Level 4 x 5 f. Level 3 x 2 g. Level 2 x 1 (3) Job titles are as follows: a. Manager Communications and Education b. Principal Media Liaison Officer c. Manager Productions and Communications d. 2 x Journalists e. Communications Assistant f. Coordinator Design/Production g. Graphic Designer h. Graphic Artist i. 3 x Community Education Officers GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS - DETAILS 712. Mr M.J. Birney to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services; Justice; Community Safety (1) Have any agencies or departments under the Minister’s control entered into any contractual arrangements with any of the following companies since February 2001 - (a) Strategic Computer Solutions (SCS); (b) Strategic & IT Consulting Services; (c) Strategic Knowledge Solutions; or (d) Nexus Strategic Solutions? (2) If yes to (1) can the Minister please advise - (a) what was the contract for; (b) what was the value of the contract; and (c) when was the contract signed? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: Department of Corrective Services (1) (a)-(d) No (2) Not applicable Western Australia Police (1) (a)-(c) No (d) 2 (2) (a)-(c) Contract: Pilot Mentoring Program Value (GST Inclusive): $6,875 Signed: 20 November 2002 Contract: Mentoring Program Value (GST Inclusive): $18,000 Signed: 14 April 2004
3568 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Office of Crime Prevention; Office of Road Safety (1) (a)-(d) No (2) (a)-(c) Not applicable Fire and Emergency Authority of WA (FESA) (1)-(2) The Fire and Emergency Services Authority (FESA) has not entered into any formal contracts with any of the listed companies. However, please note that FESA has made several purchases primarily during 2001/02 for computer software under Common Use Arrangement.
Customer/Supplier Name Date of Order Description of Purchase Value of Order Strategic Computer Solutions 29/08/2001 Right Fax Software, Lotus Notes E-mail $20,097.00 Gateway, Additional Fax Port and Base Installation Services Strategic Computer Solutions 19/03/2002 Maintenance for RightFax Software $2,269.30 Maintenance for Brooktrout Fax Card Strategic Computer Solutions 10/04/2002 Upgrade Advantage Software $12,578.87 Strategic Computer Solutions 18/04/2002 Software Exchange 2000, Windows 2000 $131,367.87 Server Standard Strategic Computer Solutions 04/07/2002 Trend Micro NEAT Suite Software $14,898.40 GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES - STAFF 917. Ms K. Hodson-Thomas to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services; Justice; Community Safety I refer to concerns raised with me about the employment of some individuals within the public sector and on Parliamentary boards, reviews, committee, enquiries and taskforces. Can the Minister please advise in connection with all the Government agencies currently under the Minister’s responsibility - (1) Have any of the following individuals currently or in the last ten years been on any government payroll - (a) Corrini Macrae; (b) Graham Burkett; (c) Alan Langer; (d) Hilary Pinerua; (e) Pauline O’Connor; (f) Ken McAullay; (g) Ross Willcock; and (h) David Berry? (2) If yes to (1) for what - (a) body were they engaged? (b) duration were they engaged? (c) function were they engaged? (3) How much were they paid either in direct salary, sitting fees or any other kind of payment? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: Western Australia Police; Fire and Emergency Services Authority of WA (FESA); Office of Crime Prevention; Office of Road Safety; The Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services: (1) (a)-(h) No (2)-(3) Not applicable Department of Corrective Services (1) (a)-(h) No (2)-(3) Not applicable GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 942. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Premier; Minister for Public Sector Management; State Development; Federal Affairs For each Department and Agency under the Premier’s control, including the Premier’s office, will the Premier please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of -
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3569
(A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 943. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Deputy Premier; Treasurer; Minister for Government Enterprises; Minister Assisting the Minister for Public Sector Management For each Department and Agency under the Deputy Premier’s control, including the Deputy Premier’s office, will the Deputy Premier please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board.
3570 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 944. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; the Mid West and Wheatbelt For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr A.D. McRAE replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 945. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3571
Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 946. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Water Resources; Sport and Recreation For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide information in the requested form. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 947. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs For each Department and Agency under the Attorney General’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Attorney General please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking,
3572 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: MINISTERIAL OFFICE (a)-(c) Nil. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION LAW REFORM COMMISSION OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF HEALTH REVIEW SOLICITOR GENERAL (a)-(c) Nil. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH See attached [See paper 1575.] DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL The Department of the Attorney General has made the following payments to contractors/consultants between the specified dates: (A) no payments were made other than those included in the return. (B) training programs accounted for $52,920 to 6 different suppliers (C) printing accounted for $28,039 to 5 different suppliers (D) $52,795 to 3 different suppliers (E) no payments were made (F) $231,257 to 10 different suppliers. (G) no payments were made other than those included in the return (H) valuations - no payments were made (I) accounting services accounted for $171,681 to 3 different suppliers (J) customer surveys accounted for $4,559 to 1 supplier (K) benchmarking - no payments were made other than those included in the return. LEGAL AID WA (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004 (D) 5 $232,506 (G) 1 $ 6,289 (I) 1 $ 6,389 (J) 1 $ 10,700 (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004 (B) 6 $ 20,266 (D) 2 $245,879 (G) 1 $ 17,651 (I) 2 $ 2,790 (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 (B) 1 $ 318 (D) 8 $419,694 (G) 1 $ 16,797 (I) 1 $ 20,884 (J) 1 $ 6,685 W.A. ELECTORAL COMMISSION (A)-(C) Nil (D) (a) 2; $208,000 (b) 5; $407,000 (c) 3; $238,000
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3573
(E)-(K) Nil Answering questions of this nature are time consuming and labour resource intensive. For each department and agency, it requires diverting scarce resources away from core service provision. If the Member has a specific question, I will endeavour to answer it, but I am unable to continually agree to limited resources, particularly health resources, being diverted to across-the-board detailed "catch all" questions. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 949. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 950. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs; Tourism; Culture and the Arts For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005?
3574 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Ms S.M. McHALE replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 951. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for the Environment; Racing and Gaming For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 952. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking,
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3575 that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation has provided the following response: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 953. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development; Employment Protection; Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 954. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services; Justice; Community Safety For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs;
3576 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (b) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (c) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (d) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide information in the requested form. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 957. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests; Women’s Interests; Minister Assisting the Minister for Federal Affairs. For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide information in the requested form.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3577
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 958. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Small Business; Peel and the South West; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education and Training For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (a)-(k) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND MINISTERIAL OFFICES - CONSULTANTS 959. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Community Development; Seniors and Volunteering; Youth; Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure For each Department and Agency under the Minister’s control, including the Ministerial office, will the Minister please provide details of the number and cost of contractors/consultants employed in respect of - (A) engineering services; (B) training programs; (C) printing; (D) computer development and support services; (E) actuarial services; (F) publicity and promotional programs; (G) project management services; (H) valuations; (I) accounting services; (J) customer surveys; and (K) Bench marking, that were not included in the Department or Agency’s six monthly return on the engagement of consultants for the following periods - (a) 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2004; (b) 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004; and (c) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: (A)-(K) Reports of consultants engaged by all government departments and agencies on contracts for services during the specified periods have been tabled in Parliament. These reports provide details of consultants
3578 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
engaged to provide strategic advice for government to act on and do not include contractors engaged to provide the sorts of services specified in the question. In addition, contracts valued at $10,000 and above, awarded by state government departments and agencies that are subject to the State Supply Commission Act, are available on the Western Australian Government Contracting Information Bulletin Board. The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIVE SERVICES - COMMUNITY-BASED ORDERS 960. Mr R.F. Johnson to the Minister for Justice (1) How many individuals were given community-based orders during 2004-2005? (2) How many of those failed to complete the orders? (3) Of those who failed to complete the orders, how many were sent back to prison? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: (1) During 2004/2005 a total of 8,279 individuals were issued with community corrections orders (this includes all order types, not just 'community based orders' which refers to a specific order type) (2) During 2004/2005, a total of 3,195 individuals had their orders breached. This figure is not a subset of the number given under question 1 as many orders commenced during 2004/2005 would still be current: they may eventually be completed successfully or breached. (3) Of those persons who had their orders breached during 2004/2005, a total of 1,235 individuals were received in the prison system after their breach date. This includes sentenced as well as remand prisoners and prisoners received in the prison system for the first time as well as those who had been in prison previously.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 961. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Premier; Minister for Public Sector Management; State Development; Federal Affairs In respect of the Premier’s ministerial office, will the Premier please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises (including Premier’s and all other Ministerial Offices): (1) The names of all staff in Ministerial Offices (including a separate listing of placements) are provided in Tables 1 and 2. [See paper 1579.] As at 2 May 2006 there are no trainees or other categories of staff in any Ministerial Office. (2) Classification levels and employment status are provided in Table 1 for all staff other than those on placement. Annual salary details are provided in Table 3. Placement staff are paid by their home agency and salary and employment status details are not held by Department of the Premier and Cabinet. (3) Collection of this information involves considerable resources and this task was recently completed for another parliamentary purpose. Consequently details of vehicles, mobile phones and credit cards provided to staff as at 15 March 2006 are provided in Table 1. Pagers are issued infrequently. Computers and faxes are provided as required for business purposes.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3579
Travel is undertaken as required for business purposes and is not regarded as a benefit or entitlement. Interstate and international travel is reported in quarterly Reports of Interstate and Overseas Travel Undertaken by Ministers, Members of Parliament and Officers on Official Business, which are tabled in Parliament. (4) The information sought is not easy to compile. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this part of the question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 962. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Deputy Premier; Treasurer; Minister for Government Enterprises; Minister Assisting the Minister for Public Sector Management In respect of the Deputy Premier’s ministerial office, will the Deputy Premier please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: Please refer to Question on Notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 963. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; the Mid West and Wheatbelt In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr A.D. McRAE replied: Please refer to the response provided to QON 961
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 966. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs In respect of the Attorney General’s ministerial office, will the Attorney General please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including -
3580 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: Please refer to question on notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 968. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: Please refer to question on notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 969. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs; Tourism; Culture and the Arts In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: (1)-(3) Please refer to question on notice 961. (4) (a) Ministerial Liaison Officer (b) Level 4 (c) $50, 156 (d) Nil
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 970. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for the Environment; Racing and Gaming In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3581
(3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: Please refer to question on notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 971. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation has provided the following response: Please refer to Question on Notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 972. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development; Employment Protection; Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: Please refer to question on notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 976. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests; Women’s Interests; Minister Assisting the Minister for Federal Affairs. In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)?
3582 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: Please refer to question on notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 977. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Small Business; Peel and the South West; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education and Training In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Please refer to question on notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF DETAILS AND EMPLOYMENT VACANCIES 978. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Community Development; Seniors and Volunteering; Youth; Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please provide a list detailing - (1) The names of all staff employed in the Ministerial office (including seconded staff, placements, trainees or other)? (2) The corresponding classification level, contract type and annual salary of each staff member? (3) The additional benefits/entitlements provided to each individual staff member, (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card benefits/entitlements)? (4) Any employment vacancies that exist within the Ministerial office including - (a) the title of the position; (b) classification level; (c) annual salary; and (d) other benefits/entitlements (including car, travel, phone, computer, fax, pager, credit card or other benefits/entitlements)? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: Please refer to question on notice 961. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - PLANT AND EQUIPMENT - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 984. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs In respect of the Attorney General’s ministerial office, will the Attorney General please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure on capital purchases of plant and equipment for the office during the periods -
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3583
(a) 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005; and (b) 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005? (2) For individual capital items with a cost of above $5,000, please provide details on the nature of and reason for the expenditure for each item. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) (a) A manual, and resource intensive check, has been made of ministerial invoices which discloses the following: May 2005 Lanier Facsimile Machine $1,074 June 2005 Cannon Scanner $8,157 (b) July 2005 Nokia Mobile $232 July 2005 Notebook $1,854 July 2005 Notebook $1,854 Sept 2005 Switchboard Telephone $335.50 Sept 2005 Nokia Mobile $232 Nov 2005 Notebook $1,960 Dec 2005 Olympus Digital Camera $500 (2) Scanner - required for scanning all correspondence that is received, forwarded to agencies and dispatched from the Attorney General's Office. The scanner is an essential component of the Ministerial Office document tracking system.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 997. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Premier; Minister for Public Sector Management; State Development; Federal Affairs In respect of the Premier’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Premier please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
3584 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 998. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Deputy Premier; Treasurer; Minister for Government Enterprises; Minister Assisting the Minister for Public Sector Management In respect of the Deputy Premier’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Deputy Premier please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 999. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; the Mid West and Wheatbelt In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver;
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3585
(c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr A.D. McRAE replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1001. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Water Resources; Sport and Recreation In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1002. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs In respect of the Attorney General’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Attorney General please advise -
3586 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1004. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3587
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1005. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs; Tourism; Culture and the Arts In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1006. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for the Environment; Racing and Gaming In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and
3588 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1007. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation has provided the following response: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3589
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1008. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development; Employment Protection; Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1012. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests; Women’s Interests; Minister Assisting the Minister for Federal Affairs. In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel;
3590 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1013. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Small Business; Peel and the South West; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education and Training In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF AND OFFICE POOL MOTOR VEHICLES, MINISTERIAL CAR AND DRIVER, AIR TRAVEL AND ACCOMMODATION - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1014. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Community Development; Seniors and Volunteering; Youth; Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office and parliamentary duties, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to -
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3591
(a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff and office pool motor vehicles; (b) the ministerial car and driver; (c) intrastate air travel; (d) interstate air travel; (e) international air travel; (f) intrastate accommodation; (g) interstate accommodation; (h) international accommodation; (i) spousal/partner travel; and (j) spousal/partner accommodation? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: (1)-(2) Reports of interstate and overseas travel undertaken by Ministers, spouses/partners and government officers, including costs, are completed for each quarter and tabled in Parliament. In addition, details of staff salaries and motor vehicles allocated to members of staff will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Parliamentary Question 961. The considerable amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties to provide the requested information. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1015. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Premier; Minister for Public Sector Management; State Development; Federal Affairs (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Premier’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: Premier Dr Gallop 1 January 2005 - 25 January 2006 (1)-(2) (a) 3 (b)-(f) Nil Total: 3 (3) (a) (i) Hit pylon (ii) Sideswiped third party (iii) Hit safety bumper Premier Alan Carpenter 25 January 2006 - 2 May 2006 (1)-(2) Nil (3) Not applicable
3592 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
NOTE: Motor Vehicle Insurance Claims are based on claims made by Ministers or staff employed in their respective Ministerial Offices and driver for the Premier. This does not include claims where non-Ministerial Office staff were driving a vehicle at the time of any incident resulting in a claim. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1016. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Deputy Premier; Treasurer; Minister for Government Enterprises; Minister Assisting the Minister for Public Sector Management (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Deputy Premier’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: 1 January 2005 - 2 May 2006 (1)-(2) (a) Five. (b)-(f) Nil. Total: 5 (3) · Hit bollard turning tight corner; · Scraped the boom gate box exiting the carpark; · Found on inspection when vehicle replaced - unknown how damage occurred; · Hit pillar in car park; and · Reversed into concrete pillar. NOTE: Motor Vehicle Insurance Claims are based on claims made by Ministers or staff employed in their respective Ministerial Offices and driver for the Deputy Premier. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1017. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; the Mid West and Wheatbelt (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Minister’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Mr A.D. McRAE replied: (1)-(2) (a) 2 (b) 1 (c)-(f) Nil Total: 3 (3) 1. Reversed into neighbours' fence 2. Hit pillar in carpark 3. Property Loss/Damage in Transit: Laptop found missing from luggage during travel from South Africa to Brazil. Discovered missing at Johannesburg Airport. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1020. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Attorney General’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3593
(2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) One. (2) (a) Motor vehicle - one (b)-(f) Not applicable. (3) Side of vehicle scraped in car park. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1022. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Minister’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1) Nil (2) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1023. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs; Tourism; Culture and the Arts (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Minister’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: 1 January 2005 - 2 May 2006 (1)-(2) (a) 1 (b)-(f) Nil Total: 1 (3) Damage found on inspection on return to car MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1024. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for the Environment; Racing and Gaming (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Minister’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005?
3594 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (1)-(2) (a) 2 (b)-(f) Nil Total: 2 (3) 1. Scraped LHS door on concrete column 2. Mirror vandalised on street MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1025. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Minister’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation has provided the following response: 10 March 2005 - 2 May 2006 (1)-(2) (a)-(f) Nil (3) Not applicable MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1026. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development; Employment Protection; Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Minister’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: (1)-(2) (a) 2 (b) 1 (c) Nil (d) 1 (e)-(f) Nil Total: 4
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3595
(3) 1. Malicious damage - vehicle vandalised 2. Third party hit agency vehicle after failing to give way - Thomas St & Onslow Rd 3. Accidental Damage: Water damage to mobile phone in bag. Damage due to leaking water bottle 4. Details for individual claims are personal and confidential MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1030. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests; Women’s Interests; Minister Assisting the Minister for Federal Affairs. (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Minister’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: 25 November 2005 - 2 May 2006 (1)-(2) (a) 2 (b)-(f) Nil Total: 2 (3) 1. Agency car sideswiped. Third party changed lane and hit side of agency vehicle. 2. Agency driver at fault. Hit pole while reversing. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - INSURANCE CLAIMS - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1032. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Community Development; Seniors and Volunteering; Youth; Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (1) What was the total number of insurance claims made through RiskCover by the Minister’s ministerial office since 1 January 2005? (2) What was the category under which each claim fell, including - (a) motor vehicles; (b) property; (c) business interruption; (d) workers’ compensation; (e) liability; and (f) miscellaneous? (3) What were the circumstances surrounding each individual claim? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: (1)-(2) Nil. (3) Not applicable. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1033. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Premier; Minister for Public Sector Management; State Development; Federal Affairs In respect of the Premier’s ministerial office, will the Premier please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages);
3596 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1034. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Deputy Premier; Treasurer; Minister for Government Enterprises; Minister Assisting the Minister for Public Sector Management In respect of the Deputy Premier’s ministerial office, will the Deputy Premier please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages);
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3597
(e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1035. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; the Mid West and Wheatbelt In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr A.D. McRAE replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question.
3598 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1037. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Water Resources; Sport and Recreation In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1038. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs In respect of the Attorney General’s ministerial office, will the Attorney General please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash;
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3599
(k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1040. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions);
3600 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1041. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs; Tourism; Culture and the Arts In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: (1)-(2) The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1042. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for the Environment; Racing and Gaming In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend);
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3601
(b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1043. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend);
3602 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation has provided the following response: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1044. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development; Employment Protection; Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3603
Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1048. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests; Women’s Interests; Minister Assisting the Minister for Federal Affairs. In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1049. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Small Business; Peel and the South West; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education and Training In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage;
3604 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: As I did not hold a Ministerial Portfolio nor an associated Ministerial Office during the time period encompassed by this question, I cannot provide an applicable answer.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON RUNNING OF OFFICES AND BREAKDOWN OF COSTS 1050. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Community Development; Seniors and Volunteering; Youth; Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, will the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 to 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage; (d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) running the Ministerial office (total spend); (b) office rental; (c) postage;
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3605
(d) Telephones and telephone usage (fixed, mobile and fax, including rental costs, hand sets, head sets and other accessories, faxes, calls, SMS text messages, multimedia messages); (e) printing and stationary; (f) electricity; (g) computers and technology (including software); (h) advertising; (i) flowers and plant hire; (j) petty cash; (k) entertainment (including office functions); (l) conferences; (m) couriers; and (n) internet charges? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: The substantial amount of detailed information sought is not easy to extract from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to respond to this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1051. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Premier; Minister for Public Sector Management; State Development; Federal Affairs In respect of the Premier’s ministerial office, can the Premier please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Premier's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1052. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Deputy Premier; Treasurer; Minister for Government Enterprises; Minister Assisting the Minister for Public Sector Management In respect of the Deputy Premier’s ministerial office, can the Deputy Premier please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded?
3606 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1053. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food; Forestry; the Mid West and Wheatbelt In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr A.D. McRAE replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1055. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Water Resources; Sport and Recreation In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime;
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3607
(c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide the more specific breakdowns required to answer this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1056. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs In respect of the Attorney General’s ministerial office, can the Attorney General please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1058. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including -
3608 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1059. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs; Tourism; Culture and the Arts In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1060. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for the Environment; Racing and Gaming In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3609
Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1061. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy; Science and Innovation has provided the following response: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question. MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1062. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development; Employment Protection; Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be
3610 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1066. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Disability Services; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests; Women’s Interests; Minister Assisting the Minister for Federal Affairs. In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question.
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1067. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Small Business; Peel and the South West; Minister Assisting the Minister for Education and Training In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: As I did not hold a Ministerial Portfolio nor an associated Ministerial Office during the time period encompassed by this question, I cannot provide an applicable answer.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3611
MINISTERIAL OFFICES - STAFF WAGES, TRAINING AND TRAVEL - TOTAL EXPENDITURE 1068. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Community Development; Seniors and Volunteering; Youth; Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure In respect of the Minister’s ministerial office, can the Minister please advise - (1) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 January 2005 and 30 June 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? (2) What was the total expenditure during the period 1 July 2005 and 31 December 2005 in relation to - (a) staff ordinary time wages; (b) staff overtime; (c) staff training; and (d) staff travel including - (i) allowances; (ii) travel costs; and (iii) kilometres refunded? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: (1)-(2) The considerable amount of information sought is not easy to obtain from existing records and would require a significant amount of time to prepare. Salaries for staff in the Minister's Office will be provided in response to Legislative Assembly Question on Notice 961. I am not prepared to divert resources from other essential duties in order to provide a response to this question. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - COMPLAINTS BY PARENTS OF AUTISTIC CHILDREN 1069. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many parents with autistic children have laid complaints with the Complaints Management Unit since it commenced operations? (2) How many of the complaints referred to in (1) proceeded to conciliation? (3) How many of these complaints were successfully conciliated? (4) What was the total amount paid in compensation to the parents in these cases? (5) How long did it take to resolve each complaint from the time the complaint was first made? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1) 5 claims of discrimination (specifically autism) on the grounds of impairment, in the area of education, have been lodged with the Equal Opportunity Commission against the Director General of the Department of Education and Training by parents since February 2002. The Complaints Management Unit responds to all requirements in these claims on behalf of the Director General. (2) Conciliation is a compulsory part of the Equal Opportunity Commission process. (3) Ongoing 1 Conciliated 4 (4) Terms contained in settlement deeds are confidential. (5) The 4 closed complaints took 16 months; 21 months; 2 months; 1 month. The timeline and process is managed by the Equal Opportunity Commission and State Administrative Tribunal. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - COMPLAINTS BY PARENTS OF CHILDREN WITH A DISABILITY OTHER THAN AUTISM 1070. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training How many parents with children with a disability other than autism have laid complaints with the Complaints Management Unit?
3612 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: 11 claims of discrimination (excluding autism) on the grounds of impairment in the area of education have been lodged with the Equal Opportunity Commission against the Director General of the Department of Education and Training by parents since February 2002. The Complaints Management Unit responds to all requirements in these claims on behalf of the Director General. SCHOOL OF ISOLATED AND DISTANCE EDUCATION - ENROLMENT OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES 1071. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many children with disabilities attending a government school have subsequently been enrolled in the Schools of Isolated and Distance Education (SIDE) in each of the past five years? (2) Which government schools were they previously attending? (3) What was the age of each child at the time they were enrolled in SIDE? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total enrolled N/A 5 8 10 12 New enrolments 4 3 2 (2) Ballidu PS Kimberley SOTA Dalwallinu DHS Wyndham DHS Duncraig SHS Hollywood PS School in South Australia City Beach SHS West Leeming PS Kim Beazley School Mt Lawley SHS Ocean Reef SHS Dalyellup PS (2 students) (3) Age Student No 6 2 7 1 8 1 9 1 10 1 11 1 12 1 13 3 14 3 Total 14
CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ATTENDING GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS - PROVISION OF COMPUTERS 1072. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) Under what circumstances are students with disabilities attending government schools provided with - (a) a computer for their individual use at school; and/or (b) a lap top computer for use at school and home? (2) How many children with disabilities have been provided with a computer and/or a laptop computer in each of the last five years? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1) (a) Students with disabilities in public schools are provided with a computer for their individual use based on the following criteria: - the extent to which the disability restricts access to the curriculum; - the educational outcomes established for the student as part of the documented plan; - the requirement for use across multiple classrooms or sites; - the extent to which the disability restricts the use of a standard desktop and keyboard; and: - the extent of existing computer provision following a needs assessment within the classroom environment. (b) Where students are allocated a laptop computer, with agreement from the school, the equipment may be used at home to support agreed educational outcomes.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3613
(2) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Laptops 64 63 61 71 55 314 Desktop Computers 21 8 18 33 12 92 CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ATTENDING GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS - PROVISION OF EDUCATION ASSISTANTS 1073. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many children with special needs attending government - (a) primary schools; (b) secondary schools; (c) district high schools; and (d) other educational institutions have been provided with an educational assistant in each of the past five years? (2) What was the FTEs for educational assistants employed in government - (a) primary schools; (b) secondary schools; (c) district high schools; and (d) other educational institutions in each of the past five years? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: 1. Public schools that enrol eligible students may receive supplementary resources such as education assistant allocation. * Eligible students are those with a diagnosis within one of the indicated groups: * Global Developmental Delay (under 6 years of age) * Intellectual Disability * Autism * Vision Impairment * Deaf and Hard of Hearing * Severe Mental Health * Physical Disability * Severe Medical/Health Condition (a) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 No of Students 1659 1893 2130 1404 2381 2333* * All figures for 2001 - 2005 are based on 31 December data. The figure for 2006 is as of 8 May. (b) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006* No of Students 352 429 485 245 614 947 * All figures for 2001 - 2005 are based on 31 December data. The figure for 2006 is as of 8 May. (c) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006* No of Students 269 280 291 201 352 317 * All figures for 2001 - 2005 are based on 31 December data. The figure for 2006 is as of 8 May. (d) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006* No of Students 2284 2322 2369 2396 2320 2309 * All figures for 2001 - 2005 are based on 31 December data. The figure for 2006 is as of 8 May. 2. (a) Primary schools: 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2205.1 2638.61 2808.66 3071.26 3106.1 (b) Secondary schools: 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 282.05 347.49 387.48 483.23 514.61
3614 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(c) District high schools: 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 290.14 339.19 357.58 377.44 349.23 (d) Other educational institutions: 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 537.06 588.14 623.56 671.76 688.55 CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ATTENDING GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS - PROVISION OF EDUCATION ASSISTANTS 1074. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many kindergarten children with special needs attending government schools were provided with an educational assistant in each of the past five years? (2) What was the FTEs for educational assistants employed to assist children in kindergartens in government schools in - (a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003; (c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Public schools that enrol eligible students may receive supplementary resources such as education assistant allocation. Eligible students are those with a diagnosis within one of the indicated groups: * Global Developmental Delay (under 6 years of age); * Intellectual Disability; * Autism; * Vision Impairment; * Deaf and Hard of Hearing; * Severe Mental Health; * Physical Disability; and * Severe Medical/Health Condition (1) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 No of Students 76 125 125 213 234 133* *All figures for 2001 - 2005 are based on December 31 data. The figure for 2006 is as of the 8 May. (2) Schools are allocated an amount of FTE for education assistant time, as per the answer to question 1073(2). The decision on how the FTE is deployed to support students across year cohorts is the responsibility of the school principal. Centralised figures about the allocation of education assistant time to particular year levels are not available.
CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ATTENDING GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS - PROVISION OF EDUCATION ASSISTANTS 1075. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many pre-primary children with special needs attending government schools were provided with an educational assistant in each of the past five years? (2) What was the FTEs for educational assistants employed to assist children in pre-primary in government schools in - (a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003; (c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Public schools that enrol eligible students may receive supplementary resources such as education assistant allocation. Eligible students are those with a diagnosis within one of the indicated groups:
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3615
* Global Developmental Delay (under 6 years of age) * Intellectual Disability * Autism * Vision Impairment * Deaf and Hard of Hearing * Severe Mental Health * Physical Disability * Severe Medical/Health Condition (1) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 No of Students 249 268 293 263 426 290 *All figures for 2001 - 2005 are based on December 31 data. The figure for 2006 is as of the 8 May. (2) Schools are allocated an amount of FTE for education assistant time, as per the answer to question 1073(2). The decision on how the FTE is deployed to support students across year cohorts is the responsibility of the school principal. Centralised figures about the allocation of education assistant time to particular year levels are not available. CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ATTENDING GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS - PROVISION OF EDUCATION ASSISTANTS 1076. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many Year 3 children with special needs attending government schools were provided with an educational assistant in each of the past five years? (2) What was the FTEs for educational assistants employed to assist Year 3 children in government schools in - (a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003; (c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Public schools that enrol eligible students may receive supplementary resources such as education assistant allocation. Eligible students are those with a diagnosis within one of the indicated groups: * Global Developmental Delay (under 6 years of age) * Intellectual Disability * Autism * Vision Impairment * Deaf and Hard of Hearing * Severe Mental Health * Physical Disability * Severe Medical/Health Condition (1) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 No of Students 249 268 293 263 426 290 *All figures for 2001 - 2005 are based on December 31 data. The figure for 2006 is as of the 8 May. (2) Schools are allocated an amount of FTE for education assistant time, as per the answer to question 1073(2). The decision on how the FTE is deployed to support students across year cohorts is the responsibility of the school principal. Centralised figures about the allocation of education assistant time to particular year levels are not available. CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ATTENDING GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS - PROVISION OF EDUCATION ASSISTANTS 1077. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many Year 8 students with special needs attending government schools were provided with an educational assistant in each of the past five years? (2) What was the FTEs for educational assistants employed to assist Year 8 students in government schools in -
3616 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003; (c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Public schools that enrol eligible students may receive supplementary resources such as education assistant allocation. Eligible students are those with a diagnosis within one of the indicated groups: * Global Developmental Delay (under 6 years of age) * Intellectual Disability * Autism * Vision Impairment * Deaf and Hard of Hearing * Severe Mental Health * Physical Disability * Severe Medical/Health Condition (1) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 No of Students 123 138 177 87 275 262 *All figures for 2001 - 2005 are based on December 31 data. The figure for 2006 is as of the 8 May. (2) Schools are allocated an amount of FTE for education assistant time, as per the answer to question 1073(2). The decision on how the FTE is deployed to support students across year cohorts is the responsibility of the school principal. Centralised figures about the allocation of education assistant time to particular year levels are not available.
CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ATTENDING GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS - PROVISION OF EDUCATION ASSISTANTS 1078. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many Year 11 and Year 12 students with special needs attending government schools were provided with an educational assistant in each of the past five years? (2) What was the FTEs for educational assistants employed to assist Year 11 and Year 12 students in government schools in - (a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003; (c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Public schools that enrol eligible students may receive supplementary resources such as education assistant allocation. Eligible students are those with a diagnosis within one of the indicated groups: * Global Developmental Delay (under 6 years of age); * Intellectual Disability; * Autism; * Vision Impairment; * Deaf and Hard of Hearing; * Severe Mental Health; * Physical Disability; and * Severe Medical/Health Condition. (1) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 No of Students 127 139 153 84 142 352 EA Total FTE 47.55 54.05 61.20 37.30 70.85 124.55 * As a result of the Disabilities Review, the Department has introduced a new supplementary allocative mechanism, Schools Plus, which identifies for the first time, every student requiring support to access the curriculum. The government has provided significant additional funding to support students with disabilities in public schools.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3617
(2) Schools are allocated an amount of FTE for education assistant time, as per the answer to question 1073(2). The decision on how the FTE is deployed to support students across year cohorts is the responsibility of the school principal. Centralised figures about the allocation of education assistant time to particular year levels are not available. PARENTS SUING DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - NUMBER AND DETAILS 1079. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many parents took action to sue the Department of Education and Training in each of the past five years? (2) How many of these actions in each year were successful? (3) What was the total amount paid to parents in each year? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: The following information has been provided by RiskCover, the Department's insurer. (1) The number of parents who took or indicated their intention to sue the Department for each of the following years is: 2001 23 2002 23 2003 16 2004 6 2005 11 (2) Public liability claims frequently settle 3 to 5 years after they are first submitted. To date, the following number of actions have been successful for parents: 2001 9 2002 8 2003 3 2004 1 2005 1 (3) In some instances, the plaintiff may be the child and therefore a minor in the eyes of the law. In these cases, settlement is paid to the Public Trustee to administer on behalf of the minor. The total amounts paid to parents and the Public Trustee are: 2001 $311,642.05 2002 $323,018.10 2003 $33,197.00 2004 $14,362.02 2005 $13,500.00
STUDENTS WITH AUTISM ATTENDING GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS 1080. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many boys diagnosed with autism attend government at the following levels - (a) Kindergarten; (b) Pre-primary; (c) Year 3; (d) Year 8; (e) Year 11; and (f) Year 12? (2) How many girls diagnosed with autism attend government at the following levels - (a) Kindergarten; (b) Pre-primary; (c) Year 3; (d) Year 8; (e) Year 11; and (f) Year 12? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1)-(2) The number of students by gender and school year currently attending public schools:
3618 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Year Level Boys Girls Kindergarten 41 12 Pre-primary 94 18 Year 3 76 19 Year 8 37 4 Year 11 22 4 Year 12 15 3 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - AUTISM TEAM - STAFF AND BUDGET 1081. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) What was the number of FTEs in the autism team in the Department of Education and training in - (a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003; (c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? (2) What was the budget for the autism team in - (a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003; (c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1) (a) 4 FTE (b) 6 FTE (c) 7 FTE (d) 8 FTE (e) 8 FTE (2) (a) $325 000 (b) $423 000 (c) $500 000 (d) $532 000 (e) $672 000 DISABILITY SERVICES COMMISSION - AUTISM ASSESSMENT TEAM AND WAITING TIMES FOR CHILDREN TO BE ASSESSED AND GAIN ENTRY TO PROGRAMS 1082. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Disability Services (1) What is the average waiting time for assessment by the autism assessment team after a child has been diagnosed by a paediatrician? (2) Who are the members of the autism assessment team and what are their qualifications? (3) What is the average waiting time for entry into a specific program for autistic children once they have been assessed by the autism assessment team? Mr A.D. McRAE replied: The Disabilities Services Commission advise as follows: (1) Current average waiting times for assessment by the Disability Services Commission is five (5) months for children aged 1-6 years and nineteen (19) months for school age children. (2) There is a Psychologist with a minimum four-year bachelor's degree in psychology and a Speech Pathologists with a four-year degree. (3) Average waiting time is 5 months ARCADIA FOREST 1086. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for the Environment (1) Is the Arcadia block near Collie considered to be a high conservation forest? (a) If not, why not? (b) If yes, why is it being considered for logging?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3619
(2) Has a license been issued to log the Arcadia block near Collie? (3) If yes to (2), who was the license issued to and what quotas and types of trees are to be logged and over what period? (4) As the Minister is bound by the endangered fauna species protection laws under the Regional Forest Agreement and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, has the Minister ensured that the Department for the Environment has undertaken an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) to establish what the effects of logging might be on Arcadia’s rare quokka colony and their habitat? If not, why not? (5) If an Environmental Impact Study has not been undertaken on the Arcadia block, will the Minister call for a logging moratorium in that region until that study and its results are known? (6) What safeguards will be put in place to ensure the quokka habitat in the Arcadia forest is not disturbed during the proposed logging operation? (7) Is there a possibility that if logging is undertaken in the Arcadia block, that the northern jarrah mainland quokka could face extinction due to damage or loss of its habitat? (8) Is the Minister aware that the proposed logging of Arcadia forest could fragment and separate important the quokka corridor habitat between the Preston and Collie rivers resulting in the Arcadia quokka colony being separated from the northern quokka colony? (a) If so, what will be done to ensure that does not happen? (9) Has the Arcadia block been included in a reserve system and if so, which one? (a) If not, why not? (10) Are there any other similar forest blocks like Arcadia that have not been included in a reserve system? (a) If so, which ones and why have they not been included? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (1) No. (a) The conservation values of Arcadia forest block were assessed as part of the proposed expansion of the Wellington National Park. The Government's first term Protecting our old-growth forests policy included a commitment to place an immediate moratorium on logging to undertake an assessment of the scientific, economic and community values, and the impact of logging on salinity of the proposed expansion of Wellington National Park. A report titled "Assessment of the Scientific, Economic and Community Values and the Impact of Logging on salinity of Areas Subject to a Moratorium on Logging", was prepared for the Conservation Commission of Western Australia in August 2001 by consultants URS Australia to fulfil the commitment to an assessment. The report reviewed and documented the values of each of the areas subject to the moratorium, with a specific focus on nature conservation values. The Government considered the report and announced in January 2002 that there were no significant high conservation value findings that warranted additional reservation in Arcadia. (b) Not applicable. (2) Licences, as such, are not issued for logging. The Forest Management Plan 2004-2013 (FMP) allows for timber production on a sustained yield basis on indigenous State forest. Under the FMP, 3,245 hectares of Arcadia forest block is State forest available for timber harvesting. The 2006 Timber Harvesting Plan includes a coupe in Arcadia 03 that has been approved for timber harvesting. (3) Under the Forest Products Act 2000, the Forest Products Commission (FPC) is responsible for the harvesting of forest products on State forest. The majority of product to be harvested in Arcadia forest block is jarrah sawlog. The period of time available for timber harvesting is the life of the FMP (2004- 2013). (4) No. An EIS is not required. The FMP provides for the management of fauna at various scales to ensure their conservation. The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) has assessed and endorsed the ecologically sustainable
3620 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
forest management principles underlying the FMP, and the FMP itself. The assessment considered impacts on a range of values, one of which was the protection of fauna. Clause 24 of the Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) for the south west forest region of Western Australia, states that the Commonwealth confirms that its obligations under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) have been met for activities that are carried out in accordance with the RFA. This means that where the Commonwealth has a decision making role for an activity that is carried out under the terms of the RFA, they will assume that all the provisions of the Act are complied with. At the coupe level, individual harvest proposals undergo an internal review process by the FPC and the Department of Conservation and Land Management (CALM). This process assesses the impact of timber harvesting on a range of values including flora, fauna and threatened ecological communities. Where harvesting activities have the potential to impact on endangered fauna, harvest plans may be modified to provide for their conservation. (5) No. (6) Stream zones, where vegetation cover is most dense, are the most likely quokka habitat. Stream zones are informal reserves and are excluded from timber harvesting. Where quokkas are predicted to occur, streamside vegetation is inspected for evidence of quokkas, the construction of new roads or tracks or the upgrading of old tracks along the edge of streamside quokka habitat is avoided where possible, the construction of new tracks across stream zones in quokka habitat is also avoided, and additional fox baiting is carried out along tracks in the harvest area and up to two kilometres around the harvest area. Fox baiting is repeated for three years until ground cover has returned. In addition, two indicative Fauna Habitat Zones of 200 hectares each, as well as silvicultural exclusion areas, are part of the management of Arcadia forest block to ensure that biodiversity recovers between timber harvesting rotations. (7) No. (8) It is unlikely that the proposed logging of Arcadia forest could fragment and separate the quokka population in Arcadia from those to the north. Any corridor would most likely be along the streams where vegetation cover is densest and these are protected from timber harvesting as informal reserves. (a) Not applicable. (9) Some areas of Arcadia forest block have been included in the informal reserve system. (a) See answer to (1)(a). (10) There are approximately 1.2 million hectares of State forest located in numerous forest blocks that have not been included in the formal reserve system. (a) Information on forest blocks that have been considered for inclusion in the reserve system and the values they contain are outlined in the reports Assessment of the Scientific, Economic and Community Values and the Impact of Logging on salinity of Areas Subject to a Moratorium on Logging (URS, 2001) and A Review of High Conservation Values in Western Australia's South-West Forests - A Report to the Conservation Commission of Western Australian (Ecoscape [Australia] Pty Ltd, 2002). HOSPITALS - OPERATING THEATRE CLOSURES DURING EASTER 2006 1089. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Health. (1) What is the total number of operating theatres at each of the following hospitals - (a) Royal Perth Hospital; (b) Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital; (c) Princess Margaret Hospital for Children; (d) King Edward Memorial Hospital; (e) Fremantle Hospital; (f) Joondalup Health Campus; and (g) Bunbury Health Campus? (2) How many of the operating theatres at each of the hospitals referred to in (1) were closed over the Easter 2006 period and for how long? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: It is not unusual for theatre activity to be reduced over any extended holiday period such as Easter or Christmas. Theatre availability over the Easter weekend is like any other weekend or public holiday. That is, theatres are available and staffed for emergency procedures only. Easter also often corresponds to the start of the school
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3621 holidays. Many staff including nurs2es and surgeons take leave over this period. Therefore, the hospital plans each year for a reduction in theatre activity over this period. The extent of the reduction will vary from year to year. This year activity reduced for the full two weeks of the school holidays. Therefore, it is possible that not all theatres would be utilised 100% over this period. This situation has occurred for a number of years and certainly prior to 2001. A similar situation applies to Christmas and New Year Holiday periods. Joondalup Health Campus records do not indicate that theatres were not utilised other than in the circumstances described above prior to 2001. The type of public surgery might change according to the type of surgery funded; for example, a focus on the longest waiting patients, as happened in the three months to June 1999. See table attached. [See paper 1576.] MINISTERS OF THE CROWN - COMMITTEES, BOARDS, TRIBUNALS 1090. Dr E. Constable to the Premier; Minister for Public Sector Management; State Development; Federal Affairs What is the name of each committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies within the Premier’s portfolio? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises (including the Office of Shared Services): The Committees, Boards, Tribunals, Advisory Boards and other similar bodies reported hereunder are those with external members and for which appointments are made by the Premier or Cabinet. Government House Foundation Council; and Salaries and Allowances Tribunal Governor's Establishment advises: Not applicable The Office of the Public Sector Standards Commissioner advises: CEO Diversity Forum The CEO Diversity Forum was established in December 1999, and is now a sub-committee of the Strategic Management Council. Department of Industry and Resources advises: The following list details the name of each committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies that required Ministerial or Cabinet approval within the Premier's portfolio: Information and Communications Technology Industry Development Forum Technology Precinct Management Board MINISTERS OF THE CROWN - COMMITTEES, BOARDS, TRIBUNALS 1091. Dr E. Constable to the Deputy Premier; Treasurer; Minister for Government Enterprises; Minister Assisting the Minister for Public Sector Management. What is the name of each committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies within the Deputy Premier’s portfolio? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: Department of Treasury and Finance (1) The Anzac Day trust. (2) Business Tax Review Reference Committee. (3) State Tax Review Reference Group. (4) State Tax Review Technical Committee. Economic Regulation Authority (1) Gas Marketing Code Consultative Committee. Appointed by the Minister for Energy. (2) Economic Regulation Authority (ERA) Governing Body. Appointed by the Governor. (3) Economic Regulation Authority Consumer Consultative Committee (ERACC). Appointed by the ERA. (4) Technical Rules Committee. Appointed by the ERA. GESB (1) Government Employees Superannuation Board (GESB). (2) Parliamentary Superannuation Board.
3622 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Gold Corporation The Gold Corporation Board. Insurance Commission (1) Board of Commissioners, Insurance Commission of Western Australia. (2) Board of Directors, State Government Insurance Corporation. Lotterywest The Lotteries Commission Board. Office of Native title (1) Native Title Interagency Coordination Committee. (2) Alternative Settlement State Steering Committee. (3) Ord Implementation Steering Committee. Office of Auditor General The Office does not have any formal operating committees, boards, tribunals or advisory boards. State Supply Commission (1) State Supply Commission Board. (2) State Tenders Committee. WA Treasury Corp (1) Board of Directors Western Australian Treasury Corporation. (2) Authorising Officer: David Butler, Chief Executive Officer
MINISTERS OF THE CROWN - COMMITTEES, BOARDS, TRIBUNALS 1093. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training What is the name of each committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies within the Minister’s portfolio? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: BCITF * The Building and Construction Industry Training Board. Department of Education Services * Higher Education Advisory Committees (convened as necessary from time to time for the purposes of the Higher Education Act 2004) * Western Australian Higher Education Council * Interdepartmental Committee on Higher Education in Regional Western Australia * Non-Government School Registration Advisory Panels (convened as required) * Non-Government Schools Planning Advisory Committee * Rural and Remote Education Advisory Council (RREAC) * Western Australian Aboriginal Education and Training Council (WA AETC) * Western Australian College of Teaching Board (WACOT) Department of Education and Training * Aboriginal Education and Training Council * Boodarie Iron Worker Support Program Advisory Committee * Building and Construction Industry Training Board * Central TAFE Governing Council * Central West TAFE Governing Council * Challenger TAFE Governing Council * Country High School Hostels Authority * CY O'Connor College of TAFE Governing Council * Governing Council Albany * Great Southern TAFE * Kimberley TAFE Governing Council * Ministerial Advisory Council on Child Protection (MACCP) * Pilbara TAFE Governing Council * Public Education Endowment Trust * Skills Formation Taskforce
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3623
* South West Regional College of TAFE Governing Council * State Training Board * Swan TAFE Governing Council * The Curriculum Council * Training Accreditation Council * West Coast TAFE Governing Council * Worker Assistance Program Advisory Committee Curriculum Council * The Curriculum Council (The Curriculum Council Act 1997) MINISTERS OF THE CROWN - COMMITTEES, BOARDS, TRIBUNALS 1098. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs; Tourism; Culture and the Arts What is the name of each committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies within the Minister’s portfolio? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: Department of Indigenous Affairs Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee Aboriginal Lands Trust Tourism WA Tourism Western Australia Board of Commissioners Rottnest Island Authority WA Rottnest Island Authority Board Department of Culture and the Arts State Records Commission State Records Advisory Committee Swan Bells Foundation Community Cultural and Arts Facilities Fund Assessment Panel Sound Attenuation Support Program Fund Assessment Panel Museum Policy Reference Group ArtsWA Indigenous Arts Peer Assessment Panel ArtsWA Young People and the Arts Peer Assessment Panel ArtsWA Arts Development Peer Assessment Panel ArtsWA Contemporary Music Peer Assessment Panel ArtsWA Designer Fashion Peer Assessment Panel The Art Gallery of Western Australia The Board of the Art Gallery of Western Australia The Perth Theatre Trust The Perth Theatre Trust Board The State Library of Western Australia The Library Board of Western Australia Western Australian Museum The Western Australian Museum Board ScreenWest ScreenWest Board The above mentioned list indicates those committees, boards, tribunals, advisory boards and similar bodies that require Ministerial or Cabinet approval. MINISTERS OF THE CROWN - COMMITTEES, BOARDS, TRIBUNALS 1101. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development; Employment Protection; Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern What is the name of each committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies within the Minister’s portfolio? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER replied: The following list indicates those committees, boards, tribunals, advisory boards and similar bodies that require Ministerial or Cabinet approval:
3624 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
Department of Industry and Resources advises: Minister for Resources and Assisting the Minister for State Development (a) Coal Industry Superannuation Board (b) Coal Miners' Welfare Board of Western Australia Department of Employment Protection advises: (a) Mining Industry Advisory Committee (b) Board of Examiners (Mine Managers/Underground Supervisors) (c) Board of Examiners (Quarry Managers) (d) Mines Survey Board (e) Board of Examiners (Winding Engine Drivers) (f) WorkCover Board (g) Commission for Occupational Safety and Health (h) Construction Industry Portable Paid Long Service Leave Board (i) Coal Industry Tribunal (j) Code Monitoring Committee for the Code of Practice for the Building and Construction Industry (k) Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission WorkCover advises that the following list indicates those committees, boards, tribunals, advisory boards and similar bodies that require Ministerial or Cabinet approval: 1. WorkCover Western Australia Authority 2. Medical Committee Department of the Registrar, WA Industrial Relations Commission advises: There are no such bodies within the Department of the Registrar. Construction Industry Long Service Leave Payments Board advises: Construction Industry Long Service Leave Payments Board comes under the Minister's portfolio. Goldfields-Esperance Development Commission advises: Goldfields-Esperance Development Commission Board of Management comes under the Minister's portfolio. Great Southern Development Commission advises: The name of the only committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies within the Minister's Great Southern Portfolio is the Great Southern Development Commission Board of Management. MINISTERS OF THE CROWN - COMMITTEES, BOARDS, TRIBUNALS 1105. Dr E. Constable Minister for Disability Services; Citizenship and Multicultural Interests; Women’s Interests; Minister Assisting the Minister for Federal Affairs. What is the name of each committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies within the Minister’s portfolio? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: The list of committees, board, tribunals, advisory boards and all other similar bodies includes reported hereunder are those for which appointments are made by the Minister or by Cabinet. Disability Services Board of the Disability Services Commission Ministerial Advisory Council on Disability Women’s Interest The Indigenous Women’s Congress. Citizenship and Multicultural Interests Advisory Board of The Constitutional Centre of Western Australia MINISTERS OF THE CROWN - COMMITTEES, BOARDS, TRIBUNALS 1107. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Community Development; Seniors and Volunteering; Youth; Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure What is the name of each committee, board, tribunal, advisory board and all other similar bodies within the Minister’s portfolio? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: As of 2 May 2006, the following is a list of committees, boards, tribunals, advisory boards and all other similar bodies within the Minister's portfolio of Community Development; Seniors and Volunteering and Youth:
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3625
1. ADOPTIONS APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE 2. ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE PREVENTION OF DEATHS OF CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE 3. CARERS ADVISORY COUNCIL 4. CASE REVIEW BOARD 5. CASE REVIEW PANEL 6. CHILD CARE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 7. CHILD DEATH REVIEW COMMITTEE 8. CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE IN CARE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 9. FAMILY AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ABORIGINAL REFERENCE GROUP 10. GWENN MURRAY REPORT IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE 11. INTERDEPARTMENTAL CHILD PROTECTION COORDINATION COMMITTEE 12. STATE HOMELESSNESS STRATEGY MONITORING COMMITTEE 13. SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SAAP) STATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 14. WA ABORIGINAL CHILD HEALTH SURVEY REFERENCE GROUP With respect to the Minister's role of Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (as of 2 May 2006): This response will be forthcoming from the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. PROGRAMS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE - BUDGET 1108. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services (1) What budgets were allocated and spent on programs related to domestic violence in each of the following years - (a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003; (c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1) (a)-(e) The Western Australia Police has no specific budget allocated to domestic violence programs, however it has a number of dedicated Units that deal with domestic violence which incorporates spousal and child abuse. The primary police units dealing with these issues are the Family Protection Unit, Child Protection Squad, Child Interview Unit, ANCOR Unit and Cyber Predator Team. There are 14 dedicated Child Protection and Domestic Violence officers located in districts state-wide. Dealing with domestic violence forms a significant proportion of the duties carried out by frontline officers at police stations throughout the State. The Western Australia Police works in partnership with other agencies to achieve a whole of government approach to family and domestic violence. The WA Police is directly involved in multi-agency programs through initiatives coordinated by the Human Services Director General’s Group, Department of Community Development, Education Department and the Domestic Violence Advocacy Services. In addition District Superintendents are involved with Human Services Regional Manager Forums which consult with the wider community to identify and prioritise community needs for addressing social issues that premise community problems at a regional level. PROGRAMS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE - BUDGET 1109. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Community Development (1) What budgets were allocated and spent on programs related to domestic violence in each of the following years - (a) 2001-2002; (b) 2002-2003;
3626 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(c) 2003-2004; (d) 2004-2005; and (e) 2005-2006? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: There are a range of difficulties in providing the figures requested. Allocation or budget for domestic violence Government and non-Government funded programs are provided each year. However expenditure on domestic violence programs provided by the non government sector can be spent across financial years. In addition, expenditure on domestic violence is recorded at a service level and not separately identified at a cost centre or budgetary level. To undertake more detailed estimations and searching would take significant resources from the Department for Community Development. Should the member be more specific of particular programs, I can ask the Department to undertake manual searching to attempt to provide that information. Therefore the budget for domestic violence programs is provided: a) $17,197,773. b) $19,029,286. c) $19,794,146. d) $20,851,765. e) $21,029,071. SIR CHARLES GAIRDNER HOSPITAL - WAITING TIME FOR URGENT INITIAL CONSULTATION 1114. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Health (1) What is the average waiting time for an appointment for an urgent initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital - (a) orthopaedic clinic; (b) psychiatry clinic; (c) ophthalmology clinic; (d) cardiology clinic; (e) urology clinic; and (f) ear, nose and throat clinic? (2) What is the average waiting time for an appointment for a routine initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital - (a) orthopaedic clinic; (b) psychiatry clinic; (c) ophthalmology clinic; (d) cardiology clinic; (e) urology clinic; and (f) ear, nose and throat clinic? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: 1. The average waiting time for an appointment for an urgent initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital is: (a) orthopaedic clinic: Usage of urgency codes is not the preferred option within this clinic. Referrals are categorised according to sub-specialty. Waiting time is therefore dependent on the nature of the referral. This is determined on the basis of urgency within each sub-specialty. Urgent referrals are seen within 90 days. The SCGH orthopaedic clinic allocated 850 appointments between May 2005 and April 2006 to patients whose conditions were considered urgent (b) psychiatry clinic: A normal outpatient clinic does not operate. Urgent consultations from the consultation liaison service (for in-patients) will occur within a few days. (c) ophthalmology clinic: There is zero waiting time, for an urgent initial consultation, ophthalmology patients requiring an urgent appointment are seen straightaway (d) cardiology clinic: The average waiting time for an urgent appointment is 32 days. However, individual cases may be seen earlier depending on the deterioration of the presenting cardiac condition.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3627
(e) urology clinic: The average waiting time for an urgent appointment is 20 days. (f) ear, nose and throat clinic: The average waiting time for an urgent appointment is 6 days 2. The average waiting time for an appointment for a routine initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital is: (a) orthopaedic clinic: See 1 (a). The average waiting time for less urgent appointments is 270 days. (b) psychiatry clinic: A normal outpatient clinic does not operate. The consultation liaison service refers patients to the department and the waiting time for a non-urgent appointment is up to three months. (c) ophthalmology clinic: The average waiting time is 43 days for category 2 urgency and 28 days for category 3 urgency. The reason for this is that if a Category 3 patient's condition deteriorates, they will be moved up to Category 2 - hence the waiting time for a Category 2 appointment increases. In addition, Consultant supervision is required for performance of a number of procedures that fall within Category 2 - therefore, the wait time is affected by Consultant availability/theatre lists. (d) cardiology clinic: The average waiting time is 109 days for category 2 urgency and 284 days for category 3 urgency. (e) urology clinic: The average waiting time is 116 days for category 2 urgency and 130 days for category 3 urgency. (f) ear, nose and throat clinic: The average waiting time is 33 days for category 2 urgency and 124 days for category 3 urgency. The allocation of appointments is dependent upon the nature of the referral, the specialty and availability of a Consultant. All referrals are assessed and prioritised according to clinical need. Category 1: Appointment within 30 days of date of receipt of referral. Category 2: Appointment within 90 days of date of receipt of referral. Category 3: Appointment within 365 days of date of receipt of referral. Patients are encouraged to contact their General Practitioner in the event that their condition deteriorates whilst waiting for an outpatient appointment. The General practitioner can then liaise directly with the registrar of the department concerned to expedite an appointment. ROYAL PERTH HOSPITAL - WAITING TIME FOR URGENT INITIAL CONSULTATION 1115. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Health (1) What is the average waiting time for an appointment for an urgent initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Royal Perth Hospital - (a) orthopaedic clinic; (b) psychiatry clinic; (c) ophthalmology clinic; (d) cardiology clinic; (e) urology clinic; and (f) ear, nose and throat clinic? (2) What is the average waiting time for an appointment for a routine initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Royal Perth Hospital - (a) orthopaedic clinic; (b) psychiatry clinic;
3628 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(c) ophthalmology clinic; (d) cardiology clinic; (e) urology clinic; and (f) ear, nose and throat clinic? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: 1. The average waiting time for an appointment for an urgent initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Royal Perth Hospital (RPH) is: (a) Orthopaedic Clinic: Referrals are categorised according to sub-speciality. Waiting time is therefore dependent on the nature of the referral. The range is 30 to 60 days, average 47 days. (b) Psychiatry Clinic: Urgent consultations - average 15 days. (c) Ophthalmology Clinic: There is zero waiting time for an urgent initial consultation, ophthalmology patients requiring an urgent appointment are seen straightaway or within one day. (d) Cardiology Clinic: The waiting time for an urgent appointment is 7 - 14 days with the average waiting time being 9.9 days. (e) Urology Clinic - The average waiting time for an urgent appointment is 42 days. (f) Ear, Nose & Throat Clinic The average waiting time for an urgent appointment is 12 days. 2. The average waiting time for an appointment for a routine initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Royal Perth Hospital is: (a) Orthopaedic Clinic: The average waiting time for routine appointments is 195 days. (b) Psychiatry Clinic: The waiting time for a non-urgent appointment is 23 days. (c) Ophthalmology Clinic: The average waiting time is 44 days. (d) Cardiology Clinic: The average waiting time is 112 days. (e) Urology Clinic: The average waiting time is 57 days. (f) Ear, Nose and Throat Clinic: The average waiting time is 56 days. Patients are encouraged to contact their General Practitioner in the event that their condition deteriorates whilst waiting for an outpatient appointment. The General practitioner can then liaise directly with the registrar of the department concerned to expedite an appointment. FREMANTLE HOSPITAL - WAITING TIME FOR URGENT INITIAL CONSULTATION 1116. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Health (1) What is the average waiting time for an appointment for an urgent initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Fremantle Hospital - (a) orthopaedic clinic; (b) psychiatry clinic; (c) ophthalmology clinic; (d) cardiology clinic; (e) urology clinic; and (f) ear, nose and throat clinic?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3629
(2) What is the average waiting time for an appointment for a routine initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Fremantle Hospital - (a) orthopaedic clinic; (b) psychiatry clinic; (c) ophthalmology clinic; (d) cardiology clinic; (e) urology clinic; and (f) ear, nose and throat clinic? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: 1. The average waiting time for an appointment for an urgent initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Fremantle Hospital (FH) is: (a) Orthopaedic clinic: Usage of urgency codes is not the preferred option with this clinic. Referrals are categorised according to sub-speciality. For Upper limb Orthopaedic patients the average waiting time for an initial consultation is 17 days. The average waiting time for Lower Limb Orthopaedic patients is also 17 days. (b) Psychiatry Clinic: The average waiting time for an urgent appointment by referral is 16 days. Some patients present to Alma Street Triage and are seen immediately if necessary. (c) Ophthalmology: The average waiting time is 17 days for an urgent appointment. (d) Cardiology: The average waiting time for an urgent appointment is 28 days. Earlier review can be arranged for more urgent situations through discussions with the cardiology registrar or, in emergency cases, through the Emergency Department. (e) Urology: The average waiting time for an urgent appointment is 10 days. (f) Ear, Nose and Throat: The average waiting time for an urgent appointment is 10 days. 2. Fremantle Hospital does not categorise routine appointments further. The average waiting time for a routine initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Fremantle Hospital is: (a) Orthopaedic: For Upper Limb Orthopaedic patients the average waiting time for an initial routine appointment is 210 days. The average waiting time for Lower Limb Orthopaedic patients is 270 days. (b) Psychiatry Clinic: The average waiting time for a routine appointment is 45 days. (c) Ophthalmology: The average waiting time is 240 days for a routine appointment. (d) Cardiology: The average waiting time for a routine appointment is 70 days. (e) Urology: The average waiting time for a routine appointment is 360 days. (f) Ear, Nose and Throat: The average waiting time for a routine appointment is 720 days. Patients are encouraged to contact their General Practitioner in the event that their condition deteriorates whilst waiting for an outpatient appointment. The General practitioner can then liaise directly with the registrar of the department concerned to expedite an appointment.
3630 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN - WAITING TIME FOR URGENT INITIAL CONSULTATION 1117. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Health (1) What is the average waiting time for an appointment for an urgent initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Princess Margaret Hospital - (a) orthopaedic clinic; (b) psychiatry clinic; (c) ophthalmology clinic; (d) cardiology clinic; (e) urology clinic; and (f) ear, nose and throat clinic? (2) What is the average waiting time for an appointment for a routine initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Princess Margaret Hospital - (a) orthopaedic clinic; (b) psychiatry clinic; (c) ophthalmology clinic; (d) cardiology clinic; (e) urology clinic; and (f) ear, nose and throat clinic? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: 1. The average waiting time for an appointment for an urgent initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH) is: (a) Orthopaedic clinic: Urgent referrals are seen usually within 24hrs (fracture) other urgent referrals next available appointment 18/7/2006. (b) Psychiatry clinic: Average waiting time is one hour for urgent consultation. (c) Ophthalmology clinic: Urgent referrals 14 days. (d) Cardiology clinic: Urgent referrals same day. (e) Urology clinic: Urgent referrals 7 days. (f) Ear, nose and throat clinic: Urgent referrals 7 days. (2) The average waiting time for a routine initial consultation in the following outpatient clinics at Princess Margaret Hospital is: (a) Orthopaedic clinic: The next available routine appointment is in September 2006. (b) Psychiatry clinic: If a PMH patient, the average waiting time for a routine psychiatric appointment varies dependent upon psychiatric service required. • In-patient acute services - booked admission - average time is 56 days. • Eating Disorders service - average time is 32 days. • Consultation Liaison service - average time 7 days. (c) Ophthalmology clinic: The next available routine appointment is in August 2006. (d) Cardiology clinic: The next available routine appointment is in June 2006.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3631
(e) Urology clinic: The next available routine appointment is end June 2006. (f) Ear, nose and throat clinic: The next available routine appointment is in October 2006. Patients are encouraged to contact their General Practitioner in the event that their condition deteriorates whilst waiting for an outpatient appointment. The General practitioner can then liaise directly with the registrar of the department concerned to expedite an appointment. NUMBER OF FINE DEFAULTERS IN WA PRISONS AND COST PER DAY OF INCARCERATION 1122. Dr E. Constable to the Minister for Justice (1) How many people are currently in Western Australian prisons because of unpaid fines? (2) How many of these fine defaulters are women? (3) What is the cost per person per day of incarceration? Ms M.M. QUIRK replied: 1 State: 24 Federal: 14 2 State: 5 Federal: 0 3 The cost of keeping a prisoner is $239.10 a day. (2004/2005 Annual Report). Note: Federal: Charged under Federal Law. State: Charged under State Law.
SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS - NUMBER, RATIO TO STUDENTS, COST 1126. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many school psychologists are currently employed by the Education Department of Western Australia? (2) How does this number compare with - (a) 2005; (b) 2004; (c) 2003; (d) 2002; and (e) 2001? (3) What is the current ratio of school psychologists to students and how does this compare with - (a) 2005; (b) 2004; (c) 2003; (d) 2002; and (e) 2001? (4) How many high schools have a full-time psychologist? (5) Which schools have full-time psychologists? (6) Will the Minister advise - (a) how many schools employ a school psychologist from their own budgets; (b) which schools employ a school psychologist from their own budgets; (c) for how much time per week; and (d) at what cost? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1) There are currently 208.8 school psychologist FTE (Full-Time Equivalent positions) filled by 257 individuals (part-time and full-time). (2) (a) In 2005 there were 203.2 school psychologist FTE filled by 255 individuals. (b) In 2004 there were 195.2 school psychologist FTE filled by 242 individuals. (c) In 2003 there were 192.8 school psychologist FTE filled by 247 individuals.
3632 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(d) In 2002 there were 194.6 school psychologist FTE filled by 249 individuals; and (e) In 2001 there were 187.2 school psychologist FTE filled by 229 individuals. (3) The current ratio of school psychologists to students is 1: 1201. (a) In 2005 the ratio was 1: 1234 (b) In 2004 the ratio was 1: 1288 (c) In 2003 the ratio was 1: 1305 (d) In 2002 the ratio was 1: 1313 and (e) In 2001 the ratio was 1: 1379 (4) 10 High Schools have full-time school psychologists. (5) Schools that have full-time school psychologists are: Balga Senior High School Ballajura Community College Cyril Jackson Senior Campus Geraldton Senior High School Girrawheen Senior High School Governor Stirling Senior High School John Forrest Senior High School and John Willcock College Lockridge Senior High School Wanneroo Senior High School (6) (a) 70 schools use their school budget and/or other sources of funding (such as the government's Behaviour Management and Discipline Strategy) to purchase additional school psychology time. (b)-(c) The following schools use their school budget or other funding to acquire additional school psychology time. The amount of time for each school is reported in FTE: Albany SHS 0.2 Atwell P 0.1 Australind SHS 0.2 Avonvale PS 0.1 Balga SHS 0.4 Ballajura Community College 0.5 Belridge SHS 0.1 Bridgetown SHS 0.8 Brookman PS 0.1 Bullsbrook DHS 0.1 Busselton SHS 0.2 Calista PS 0.1 Carcoola PS 0.1 Carine SHS 0.2 Castlereagh School 0.1 Churchlands SHS 0.2 Clarkson PS 0.1 Clarkson SHS 0.1 Collie SHS 0.2 Cooloongup PS 0.1 Cyril Jackson ESC 0.1 Cyril Jackson Senior Campus 0.5 East Victoria Park PS 0.1 Eastern Hills SHS 0.2 Ellenbrook PS 0.2 Forrestfield SHS 0.2 Gibbs Street PS 0.1 Girrawheen SHS 0.4 Glencoe PS 0.2 Governor Stirling SHS 0.4 Halls Head Community College 0.3 Hamilton SHS 0.2 Hampton SHS 0.3
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3633
John Curtin College of the Arts 0.1 John Forrest SHS 0.5 Joondalup PS 0.1 Kalamunda SHS 0.5 Kent Street SHS 0.2 Koondoola PS 0.1 Kwinana SHS 0.2 Leeming SHS 0.2 Lesmurdie SHS 0.5 Lockridge SHS 0.4 Lynwood SHS 0.2 Mandurah SHS 0.2 Melville SH Intensive English Centre 0.1 Melville SHS 0.2 Mindarie Senior College 0.2 Mirrabooka SHS 0.2 Morley SHS 0.3 Mt Barker SHS 0.1 Mt Lawley SHS 0.3 Nollamara PS 0.1 Noranda PS 0.1 North Albany SHS 0.2 Nth Lake Senior Campus 0.2 Perth Modern SHS 0.2 Phoenix PS 0.1 Rockingham SHS 0.2 Rossmoyne SHS 0.2 Safety Bay SHS 0.2 Shenton College 0.2 Swan View SHS 0.2 Toodyay DHS 0.1 Wanneroo SHS 0.3 Warnbro Community HS ESC 0.1 Warnbro Community HS 0.2 Warnbro PS 0.1 Woodbridge PS 0.1 Yule Brook College 0.3 (d) The average salary for a school psychologist is $64 100 pa. The total cost for schools purchasing school psychologist time is approximately $948 680.
HALLS CREEK COMMUNITY - HOUSING 1128. Dr K.D. Hames to the Minister for Housing and Works I refer to the recent injection of funds to address housing problems in Halls Creek. Could you please provide details of the following - (1) What funds were provided for housing in Halls Creek over the last five years? (2) What funds were provided for housing for nearby Indigenous communities over the last five years? (3) How many houses will the additional $15 million provide and where will they be located? (4) Are additional funds being provided for associated infrastructure (i.e. sewerage, roads, water, power, white goods and furniture) in those communities? (5) What is the total cost, including infrastructure, of each new home? (6) Is the Remote Area Essential Services Program (RAESP) operational in Halls Creek and the nearby communities? (7) If so, how many local Indigenous people are employed in the RAESP? (8) How many Indigenous people are on the waiting list for accommodation in and around Halls Creek? (9) How many Indigenous people have applied for but are ineligible for housing in and around Halls Creek?
3634 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(10) How do the housing problems in Halls Creek compare with other Indigenous communities (top ten only please for both town based and discreet communities)? (11) Are any figures available for the number of Indigenous people currently living on the outskirts of Halls Creek who have housing in other communities (i.e. Balgo)? (12) I note $3.5 million will be diverted from GEHA to provide housing in Halls Creek. Which specific houses will be deleted from the GEHA program to provide these funds? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: The Department of Housing and Works advises (1) $7,940,342 (2) $7,074,407 (3) Four new houses and 20 refurbished properties in the Garden Area of Halls Creek; 12 Homeswest homes in the LandCorp subdivision; 10 houses in town based communities, majority located in Mardiwah Loop; and 10 GEHA houses in the LandCorp subdivision. (4) Sites for the 4 new homes in the Garden Area are serviced, and sites for the 10 homes in the town based communities are either serviced or will be serviced following completion of a currently active service upgrade contract. (5) Approximately $350,000. (6)-(7) The Remote Area Essential Services Program (RAESP) services remote Aboriginal Communities and in Halls Creek RAESP is operational at Red Hill (Lundja). Emergency repairs to essential services are also provided at a number of town based communities that are not on the RAESP including the communities of Nicholson Camp, Yardgee and Mardiwah Loop. Work is being undertaken with Horizon Power to upgrade essential services at these four communities and the Department is also currently designing and documenting the upgrade of water and waste water services at Nicholson Camp and Red Hill. Under the Aboriginal Enterprise & Employment Tendering Preference Policy indigenous involvement, employment and training is promoted. An indigenous training component is being developed for inclusion in the construction program for the new homes. (8) 44. (9) Two who are Shire Workers. (10) While the Department advises it is not possible to prioritise towns and communities in this way, the availability of land has made it more difficult to deal with the housing issues in Halls Creek. (11) It is understood that some of the people at Dinner Camp are from the Balgo community. (12) The Government has allocated additional money to GEHA and the houses will be funded from that source. Houses have not been deleted from the GEHA program. SERVICES AND SUPPORT AVAILABLE TO FOSTER PARENTS AND FOSTER CHILDREN 1132. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Community Development (1) What services and support is made available by the Government to foster parents in Western Australia? (2) What counselling services and support are provided by the Government to foster children in Western Australia? (3) Is there a limit to the amount of time that a foster child can receive counselling provided by the Government? (4) If yes to (3), who is then responsible for the cost of continued counselling for foster children? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: (1) The Department for Community Development provides a range of services to foster parents in Western Australia. Every foster carer is supported by a subsidy to meet the day to day needs of the child in their care. The statewide Fostering Services Unit is responsible for the following: • preparation training for new General Carers • supportive learning for Relative Carers • ongoing group training • training and support for Indigenous Carers • one on one training and support • 12 month ongoing contact and support following Carer Registration
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3635
There are also one or two staff members in each District office of the Department for Community Development with responsibility for providing services and support to foster carers and children in their care (e.g. training, provision of information on entitlements and procedures, networking opportunities amongst carers for informal support etc). The Government also funds the Foster Care Association to provide • input into policy and programme development • advocacy • carer support - 24 hour access to experienced carer • advisory service and training/workshops • foster Carer Handbook - provides information relevant to providing care • social activities for foster families • clothing, toys and furniture store • emergency packs for newly placed babies and children • literature, audio-visual aids and a quarterly newsletter A confidential service (Prime) is also contracted to provide support, advice and counselling to foster carers and their families. (2) The Department for Community Development has a therapeutic service (Psychology, Assessment and Treatment Service - PATS) made up of clinical and counselling psychologists and clinical social workers. The service prioritises clinical and counselling services to children in the Chief Executive Officer's (CEO's) care and includes all children in foster care. Some children will also receive services at the Department's expense from privately practising therapists and counsellors. The available practitioners are vetted by the Department as being suitable and having the required skills for working with these children. The Department also funds non-government services to provide intensive support to families to prevent their children coming into care and prior to, and following, their return home where children enter the CEOs care. The Department is currently developing and implementing a new service, Support, Intervention and Treatment after Abuse in Care, which is aimed at promptly providing trauma related services and consultation for children harmed while in the CEO's care. (3) There is no limit to the time that a child in the care of the CEO can access counselling services. Access to services is decided upon according to need and with reference to current understandings of what will most benefit the young person concerned including structural supports, prioritising other aspects of the child's life, or other therapeutic activities. Access to private practitioners is also potentially unlimited. However, there are general expectations that such services will be regularly reviewed by reports from the private practitioner, articulating treatment gains and detailing recommendations for further action. (4) Not applicable.
BUNBURY LICENSING CENTRE - STAFF AND WAITING TIMES 1140. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan to the Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (1) How many Customer Service Officers are currently working at the Bunbury Licensing Centre? (2) How many Customer Service Officers cover the period from 12.00 pm – 2.00 pm weekdays at the Bunbury Licensing Centre? (3) What is the average waiting time to be assisted by a Customer Service Officer at the Bunbury Licensing Centre over the lunchtime period? (4) Are lunchtime waiting times recorded at the Bunbury Licensing Centre? (5) Will the Minister table full details of waiting times at the Bunbury Licensing Centre, including the longest time a person has had to wait? Mr A.D. McRAE replied: The Department of Planning and Infrastructure advise as follows: (1) The Bunbury Licensing Centre has seven Customer Service Officers and two Senior Customer Service Officers.
3636 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(2) A minimum of four Customer Service Officers cover the period from 12.00pm to 2.00pm weekdays. This includes at least one or more Senior Client Service Officers or the Branch Manager. (3)-(5) It is not possible to indicate the wait times as there is no electronic or manual queuing system to record this information GOVERNMENT SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS - TEACHER LIBRARIANS AND RESOURCE TEACHERS 1146. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many full-time teacher librarians are currently employed in Western Australian Government senior high schools? (2) How many part-time teacher librarians are currently employed in Western Australian Government senior high schools? (3) How many full-time resource teachers are currently employed in Western Australian Government senior high schools? (4) How many part-time resource teachers are currently employed in Western Australian Government senior high schools? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Schools are provided staffing via the Teaching Staffing Formula and deploy staff according to the educational needs of the students, and this varies from school to school. It can also vary during the year. Obtaining this information from all schools will require extensive time and resources. GOVERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOLS - TEACHER LIBRARIANS AND RESOURCE TEACHERS 1147. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many full-time teacher librarians are currently employed in Western Australian Government primary schools? (2) How many part-time teacher librarians are currently employed in Western Australian Government primary schools? (3) How many full-time resource teachers are currently employed in Western Australian Government primary schools? (4) How many part-time resource teachers are currently employed in Western Australian Government primary schools? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Schools are provided staffing via the Teaching Staffing Formula and deploy staff according to the educational needs of the students, and this varies from school to school. It can also vary during the year. Obtaining this information from all schools will require extensive time and resources. WEST COAST DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICE - TEACHER LIBRARIANS AND RESOURCE TEACHERS 1148. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) For the West Coast District which government schools have - (a) a full-time teacher librarian; (b) a part-time teacher librarian; (c) a full-time resource teacher; and (d) a part-time resource teacher? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Schools are provided staffing via the Teaching Staffing Formula and deploy staff according to the educational needs of the students, and this varies from school to school. It can also vary during the year. Obtaining this information from the schools in this district will require extensive time and resources. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT UNIT 1150. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training What are the - (a) names; (b) educational qualifications and experience; and
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3637
(c) specific training and experience in ‘complaints management’ of each person employed in the Complaints Management Unit of the Department of Education and Training? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (a) Manager. (b) Bachelor Physical Education; Teacher's Higher Certificate; Teacher's Certificate. (c) 37 years experience in education, including complaints management and investigative procedures. Training in related legislative and procedural aspects of complaints. (a) Principal Consultant. (b) Bachelor of Arts, Graduate Diploma of Education, Teacher's Higher Certificate, Graduate Diploma of Teacher Librarianship. (c) 33 years experience in education, human resources and industrial advocacy experience. Training in investigative techniques and procedures. (a) Senior Consultant (b) Advanced Diploma of Business Administration (c) Experience in advocacy, investigative procedures, and policy. Training in related legislative and procedural aspects of complaints. (a) Consultant (b)-(c) 29 years experience in human resources including complaints management. Training in investigative techniques and procedures. (a) Consultant (b)-(c) 25 years experience in human resources, including advocacy. Training in investigative techniques and procedures. (a) Consultant. (b)-(c) 3rd year Bachelor of Social Science, and experience and training in complaints management, policy and conducting professional development. (a) Administrative Assistant (b)-(c) Certificate II Business, and experience and training in complaints management administration. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT UNIT 1151. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training With reference to the response to question on Notice No. 790, I ask - (1) How many - (a) hours; or (b) days were involved in each of the following training courses - (i) Freedom of Information training; (ii) Industrial Advocacy course; (iii) Public Interest Disclosure Act training; (iv) Public Sector Legal Briefs course; (v) Fraud Control and Prevention in the Public Sector course; (vi) Observing Natural Justice course; (vii) Decision-Making: Quandaries in the Management of Human Resources course; (viii) Cyber-crime course; and (ix) intensive training in relation to investigative techniques. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (i) 1 day (ii) 2 Semesters over a 1 year period (iii) 1 day (iv) ½ day (v) 1 day (vi) ½ day (vii) ½ day (viii) ½ day (ix) Three separate courses of 1 day, 2 ½ days and 2 days
3638 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT UNIT 1152. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training With reference to the answer to Question on Notice No. 790, I ask - (1) Who in the Complaints Management Unit had specific experience in a complaints management unit, or similar, prior to employment in the Complaints Management Unit of the Department of Education and Training? (2) What was the specific experience referred to in (1)? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1) Manager and Principal Consultant (2) The Manager and Principal Consultant have worked in education administrative positions in schools, district office and central office. Each has in excess of 30 years in a range of administrative and management positions, all of which have included significant aspects of complaints management. The Principal Consultant has also served for two and a half years on the Teacher's Tribunal, a constituent authority of the Industrial Relations Commission adjudicating matters affecting teachers of a disciplinary and a substandard performance nature, as well as more general industrial matters. Both officers were appointed to assist with the establishment and implementation of the Complaints Management Unit, which commenced operation in 2002 on account of their recognised systemic expertise and experience in the area of human resource and complaints management. Prior to this there was no centralised unit responsible for the co-ordination and management of complaints across the Department of Education and Training. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT UNIT 1153. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training With reference to the answer to Question on Notice No. 788 how many of the complaints, both disciplinary and non- disciplinary in nature were received before 1 November 2005? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Forty-Five. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT UNIT 1154. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training How many teachers who are currently the subject of an unresolved complaint being considered by the Complaints Management Unit of the Department of Education and Training are receiving workers’ compensation payments? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: One, however, the workers' compensation payments are unrelated to CMU processes. SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHING GRADUATES - NUMBER AND AREAS OF SPECIALISATION 1155. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training I refer to the answer to Question on Notice No. 764 and point out that the Minister for Education and Training has responsibility for universities in Western Australia and ask - (1) How many secondary school teaching students graduated from Western Australian universities in each of the past five calendar years? (2) How many of the graduates in each year specialised in each of the following subject areas - (a) Languages other than English; (b) Physics; (c) Chemistry; (d) Biology; (e) Human Biology; (f) Geology; (g) Physical Science; and (h) Mathematics? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: Contrary to the claim by the Member for Churchlands, the Minister for Education and Training does not have responsibility for the universities in Western Australia. The universities are responsible to the Parliament.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3639
However, by convention, the Minister for Education has represented issues to do with universities to the Parliament. Consistent with the good working relationship the Minster has generated with the universities, the information requested by Dr Constable is now being sought and will be provided in due course. SCHOOL EDUCATION ACT 1999 - REVIEW 1156. Dr E. Constable to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training With reference to the answer to Question on Notice No. 759, I ask - (1) What are the names and qualifications of the people carrying out the review of the School Education Act 1999? (2) When did the review begin? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1) Terry Werner, B.Sc (Hons); Dip. Ed; M.Ed. (2) 2004. GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS - PROGRAMMED MAINTENANCE, CAPITAL WORKS AND MINOR WORKS - SCHEDULE AND BUDGET 1160. Mr D.T. Redman to the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Training (1) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Programmed Maintenance for schools in the Albany District for the 2002-2003 Budget? (2) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Programmed Maintenance for schools in the Albany District for the 2003-2004 Budget? (3) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Programmed Maintenance for schools in the Albany District for the 2004-2005 Budget? (4) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Programmed Maintenance for Denmark Primary School for the 2004-2005 Budget? (5) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Programmed Maintenance for Yakamia Primary School for the 2004-2005 Budget? (6) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Capital Works for Denmark Primary School for the 2004-2005 Budget? (7) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Capital Works for Yakamia Primary School for the 2004-2005 Budget? (8) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Minor Works for Denmark Primary School for the 2004-2005 Budget? (9) Would the Minister advise the budget allocation for Minor Works for Yakamia Primary School for the 2004-2005 Budget? (10) Would the Minister provide details of the Programmed Maintenance Schedule for the Albany Education District? (11) Would the Minister provide details of the Programmed Maintenance Schedule for Denmark Primary School? (12) Would the Minister provide details of the Programmed Maintenance Schedule for Yakamia Primary School? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH replied: (1) 2002-2003 - $452 754 (2) 2003-2004 - $651 928 (3) 2004-2005 - $305 137 (4) 2004-2005 - $49 165 (5) 2004-2005 - $74 591 (6) 2004-2005 - $230 000 (7) Nil (8)-(9) Minor Works funding is provided to schools as a component of the total school grant which is used to address system and local priorities. Decisions are made at the school level about expenditure on specific programs utilising available funds.
3640 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(10)-(12)Funds are yet to be allocated for 2006-2007. GOVERNMENT ACTION TO CURB PROBLEM GAMBLING 1166. Mr A.J. Simpson to the Minister for Government Enterprises Given that the Minister has stated on numerous occasions that he is concerned for problem gamblers and research suggests that increased access to gambling opportunities poses the greatest risk to those who fail to control their gambling behaviours, I ask - (1) Did the Minister or any other Minister make any representation to the Lotteries Commission in an attempt to try to stop it recently increasing its range of “Lotto” products by 40% to include two new weekly draws? (2) If so, please provide details of those efforts. Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) No. (2) Not applicable. GOVERNMENT ACTION TO CURB PROBLEM GAMBLING 1167. Mr A.J. Simpson to the Minister for Government Enterprises As the Lotteries Commission plans to take an extra $20 million per year from Western Australians via its two new “Lotto” products, will the Minister please detail any plans to ensure some portion of that extra income will be spent on the research and support of those who fail to control their gambling behaviours? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: Lotterywest is a member of the Problem Gambling Support Services Committee chaired by the Director General of the Department of Racing, Gaming & Liquor. Other members of that Committee include Burswood Resort Casino, Racing and Wagering WA, the Betting Control Board, and the Department of Community Services. The determination and provision of funding to be provided to research on problem gambling is a matter for that Committee. Lotterywest already provides a grant through its membership of that Committee for support services for those with gambling problems. The Member may also be interested to know that recent reports from the Problem Gambling Helpline funded by that Committee and the Problem Gambling Counselling Service, show that the association of problem gambling with lottery products is extremely low, and that the overall rate of problem gambling in Western Australia is by far the lowest in Australia. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT - PRESCRIBED BURNING 1169. Ms K. Hodson-Thomas to the Minister for the Environment (1) What is the total area of land under the control of the Department of CALM in its three south-west regions (Swan, South West and Warren)? (2) What area of land under the control of the Department of CALM, recorded for each of its three south- west regions - (a) was subject to departmental prescribed burning, recorded for each of the last 5 seasons 2001/2002 to 2005/2006 inclusive; and (b) is currently excluded from the prescribed burning program? (3) What area of land under the control of the Department of CALM, recorded for each of its three south- west regions is planned for departmental prescribed burning, recorded for each of the next 5 seasons 2006/2007 to 2010/2011 inclusive? (4) What area of land under the control of CALM, recorded for each of its three south-west regions, was burnt by unplanned bushfires each year over the last 5 years? (5) What separate costs were incurred by the Department of CALM, recorded each year over the last 5 years (2001/2002 to 2005/2006 inclusive) on land under the control of the Department of CALM in each of its three south west regions on - (a) prescribed burning; and (b) suppression of unplanned bushfires? (6) What are the total numbers of permanent staff employed by the Department of CALM, recorded for each of its three south west regions, and not counting staff in specialist roles such as research and inventory, subdivided into -
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3641
(a) Salaried officers; (b) Permanent wages employees; (c) Contractors; and (d) What numbers in each category are routinely available for - (i) Prescribed Burning; and (ii) Suppression of bushfires? (7) How many of each of the people in (6), listed separately by category of - (a) Staff; (b) Permanent wages employees; and (c) Contractors have five years or more experience in carrying out prescribed burns? (8) What is the policy of the Department of CALM, in terms of stated maximum tonnages of fuel per hectare, that are allowed to accumulate on land under the control of the Department in its three south west regions, before being reduced by prescribed burning in - (a) Karri forest; (b) Jarrah forest; and (c) Wandoo forest? (9) What is the policy of the Department of CALM for the length of time regrowth stands of - (a) Jarrah; and (b) Karri? will be with-held from prescribed burning following the year of regeneration? (10) How many of the following does CALM have allocated permanently to bushfire research - (a) Research scientists; and (b) Technical officers? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (1) The total area is 2,504,000 hectares comprising: Swan Region 789,000 hectares South West Region 791,000 hectares Warren Region 924,000 hectares (2) (a) The area of prescribed burning achieved was: Swan Region 2001/2002 30,000 hectares 2002/2003 41,000 hectares 2003/2004 38,000 hectares 2004/2005 79,000 hectares 2005/2006 to 12 May 2006 56,000 hectares South West Region 2001/2002 25,000 hectares 2002/2003 38,000 hectares 2003/2004 57,000 hectares 2004/2005 69,000 hectares 2005/2006 to 12 May 2006 46,000 hectares Warren Region 2001/2002 20,000 hectares 2002/2003 66,000 hectares 2003/2004 97,000 hectares 2004/2005 65,000 hectares 2005/2006 to 12 May 2006 50,000 hectares (b) The area excluded from prescribed burning is: Swan Region 110,000 hectares South West Region 120,000 hectares Warren Region 140,000 hectares (3) The indicative 3 year Prescribed Burning Plan prepared in spring 2005 contains the following areas:
3642 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 Autumn Spring Autumn Spring Spring Swan Region 38,000 85,000 21,000 73,000 19,000 South West Region 23,000 87,000 35,000 89,000 29,000 Warren Region 72,000 69,000 37,000 62,000 30,000 Total 133,000 241,000 93,000 224,000 78,000 The Master Burn Plan will be reviewed in June 2006 and the next Indicative 3 Year Plan will contain proposed burn areas for 2008 Spring and 2009 Autumn. (4) The area of unplanned wildfires attended by CALM in the south-west was: Swan Region South West Region Warren Region 2001/2002 9,000 hectares 1,000 hectares 8,000 hectares 2002/2003 44,000 hectares 2,000 hectares 94,000 hectares 2003/2004 5,000 hectares 11,000 hectares 6,000 hectares 2004/2005 39,000 hectares 1,000 hectares 10,000 hectares 2005/2006 as at 12 May 2006 14,000 hectares 2,000 hectares 3,000 hectares (5) (a) Prescribed Burning Costs ($):
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 as at 30 April 2006 Swan Region 570,493 397,000 659,000 966,000 901,000 South West Region 513,437 711,00 1,309,000 1,475,000 1,395,000 Warren Region 839,170 1,337,000 2,541,000 1,782,000 2,109,000 Total 1,923,100 2,445,000 4,509,000 4,223,000 4,405,000 (b) Wildfire Suppression Costs ($)
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 as 30 April 2006 Swan Region 2,058,913 3,271,000 2,163,000 5,141,000 2,611,000 South West Region 1,600,503 2,259,000 2,249,000 3,190,000 2,375,000 Warren Region 862,988 2,821,000 936,000 2,033,000 1,300,000 Total 4,522,404 8,351,000 5,348,000 10,364,000 6,286,000 (6) (a) Swan Region 100 FTE; South West Region 68 FTE; Warren Region 55 FTE. (b) Swan Region 79; South West Region 80; Warren Region 73. (Full-time and permanent part- time wages staff only. Additional seasonal wages staff are employed each fire season.) (c) Nil. (d) (i)-(ii) Nearly all CALM staff in Regional Services Division and regionally based specialist branches are routinely available for prescribed burning operations, if required. Nearly all CALM staff are routinely available for wildfire incidents, if required. A total of 670 CALM staff including, for example, staff from the Marine Conservation Branch, and 63 staff from the Forest Products Commission participated in the Incident Management Teams for the Perth Hills fire in January 2005. (7) These data are not readily available in the Department's staff record system. The resources and time required to extract the data would be excessive. (8) The Department's Fire Management Policy does not contain any reference to maximum fuel accumulation before prescribed burning is undertaken. The policy advocates a variety of fire regimes incorporating different frequency, intensity, season and scale. (9) The Department's Fire Management Policy does not specify a length of time required from the time of regeneration to initial prescribed burning. This period will vary according to forest site quality, condition and silvicultural treatment of the regrowth, understorey composition and other factors. (10) (a) 3 (b) 2 A significant number of other Departmental Science Division staff contribute to fire-related research, and staff in other Divisions, such as Regional and District Ecologists, carry out operational and applied research related to fire behaviour and fire ecology.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3643
PROPERTY TAXES 1170. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Treasurer (1) What amount of income has been gained from property taxes for each of the following years - (a) 2000; (b) 2001; (c) 2002; (d) 2003; (e) 2004; (f) 2005; (g) 2006; and (h) projected in 2007? (2) What amount of mining royalties has been gained for each of the following years: (a) 2000; (b) 2001; (c) 2002; (d) 2003; (e) 2004; (f) 2005; (g) 2006; and (h) projected in 2007? (3) By what percentage has property tax revenue grown on an annual basis for the following years: (a) 2000; (b) 2001; (c) 2002; (d) 2003; (e) 2004; (f) 2005; (g) 2006; and (h) projected in 2007? (4) By what percentage has mining royalties grown on an annual basis for the following years: (a) 2000; (b) 2001; (c) 2002; (d) 2003; (e) 2004; (f) 2005; (g) 2006; and (h) projected in 2007? (5) Will the Minister be doing anything to lower property taxes in Western Australia - (a) If yes, please provide details of what is planned and when those plans will be implemented? (b) If not, why not? (6) What Government charges are there on a new $373,700 broad hectare house and land property purchased in Perth? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: The Department of Treasury and Finance answer (1)-(4) Details of State revenues, from all sources, needed to fund community services like health, education and police, are published on pages 232 to 234, Appendix 2, Budget Paper Number 3, 2006-07 Economic and Fiscal Outlook. Similar details for earlier years are available from their respective Budget Papers and the annual financial outcomes published in the Government Financial Results Reports. (5) Yes. (a) On 21 March 2006, the Government announced the progressive abolition of mortgage duty, with a 50% reduction in the rate of duty from 1 July this year, and complete abolition of the duty from 1 July 2008.
3644 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
In the 2006-07 Budget, the Government announced new land tax scales that will ameliorate the impact of stronger than expected property value growth on land tax and Metropolitan Region Improvement Tax in 2006-07. These measures follow substantial property tax relief that the Government has provided since July 2004. This includes a 15% across the board reduction in conveyance duty rates, the introduction of a stamp duty exemption for a first home purchase up to $250,000 (which phases out at $350,000), and a number of adjustments to the land tax scale. Along with cuts in other taxes, the total value of tax relief measures introduced since July 2004 will total $3.3 billion over the next 4 years. In the 2005-06 Budget, the Government announced a State Tax Review, which is being undertaken in consultation with the Western Australian community, to shape tax reform over the next five years. The decision to progressively abolish mortgage duty, as well as hire of goods duty (from 1 January 2007) and non-real property conveyances (from 1 July 2010) announced in March 2006 followed consideration of public submissions to the State Tax Review and early feedback from the State Tax Review Reference Group. The Government will be considering the final report of the State Tax Review on the priorities for tax reform in the 2007-08 Budget. (b) Not applicable. (6) State Government taxes on the purchase of a new home and land package include stamp duty on conveyance and, where the purchase is financed with a loan, mortgage duty. Other fees include Department of Land Information transfer fees such as registration fees, mortgage registration fees, and land title search fees. For a broad hectare established house worth $373,700, the stamp duty on conveyance will be $14,385. The impact of government charges (including conveyance duty) on the cost of a house and land package will depend on a range of factors including the value of the land and house. The Government's October 2003 submission to the Productivity Commission Inquiry into First Home Ownership (page 41) provides an indicative breakdown of costs of a suburban greenfield development, in the Perth metropolitan region. The submission is available on the Department of Treasury and Finance's website. CHIDLOW-YORK ROAD 1171. Mr M.W. Trenorden to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (1) Will the Minister make herself aware of the amount of population growth in the shire of York since Census Day 2001? (2) Will the Minister make herself aware of the increase in volume of traffic using the Chidlow-York Road since this date? (3) Will the Minister make herself aware of any changes in the traffic mix on the Chidlow-York Road since this date? (4) Will the Minister make herself aware of the suitability of this road to handle - (a) a significant increase in traffic volume; and (b) a significant change in the mix of traffic including - (i) agriculture product transportation; (ii) commercial transportation; (iii) industrial transportation; (iv) tourism transportation; (v) public transportation; and (vi) private transportation? (5) Will the Minister make herself aware of this road’s - (a) crash history; and (b) its state average rating of crash history in comparison to similar rural roads? (6) When the Minister has finally made herself aware of the necessity to upgrade this road to meet any and all community standard expectations, will the Minister - (a) ensure the immediate required upgrade of this road through currently available surplus funding for roads, being State, Federal, or in combination; and
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3645
(b) ensure the immediate required upgrade of this road through a specific allocation of funding in the 2006-2007 budget? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(6) The member does not appear to have sought any information but rather to have made a statement. If any information as to the roads in question or to population growth is wanted I would be happy to provide it. ADVENTURE TOURISM IN WA - TOUR OPERATORS, SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS AND REPORT BY MINISTERIAL TASK FORCE 1172. Ms K. Hodson-Thomas to the Minister for Tourism (1) What are the top five tour operators that visited Karijini National Park by the number of vehicles that entered the park in 2005, 2004 and 2003? (2) What are the top five tour operators that visited Karijini National Park by the number of passengers that visited the park in 2005, 2004 and 2003? (3) What are the top five tour operators that visited Karijini National Park by the amount of park entry fees paid to the Government in 2005, 2004 and 2003? (4) What amount of park entry fees was generated by commercial operators in Karijini National Park in each of the last 5 years? (5) What amount of park entry fees was generated by commercial operators in all national parks in WA for each of the last 5 years? (6) How many tour operator licenses are there in Western Australia? (7) Why does the Government not require remote or wilderness first aid qualifications for tour operators operating in remote areas such as the Kimberley? (8) Do tour guides have any formal requirements to have training or understanding in history, geology, aboriginal heritage, cultural awareness of foreign countries, flora and fauna, group dynamics, hazard assessment, sexual harassment laws or occupational health and safety laws? (9) How many tour guides were checked each year for the past 5 years to see if their drivers licence and driving endorsements were current? (10) How many tour operator licences were cancelled each year for the past 5 years? (11) For what reasons were they cancelled? (12) How many tour guides were checked last year to see if they were driving with a 0.00 Blood Alcohol Concentration? (13) Did the taskforce look into marine adventure tourism? (14) If so, specifically what aspects were addressed? (15) Does the Minister know how many actual serious accidents occurred in adventure tourism for each year in the past 5 years? (16) If not, why not? (17) If so, how are accidents recorded? (18) Is there any requirement for tour operators to log or report serious accidents or only if a passenger is killed? (19) If not, why not? (20) In Karijini National Park, what are the major risks at Fern Pool? (21) In Karijini National Park, what are the major risks at Handrail Pool? (22) In Karijini National Park, what are the major risks at Weano Gorge? (23) In Purnululu National Park, what are the major risks walking along Piccaninny Creek? (24) In the Kimberley, what are the major risks at Manning Falls? (25) In the Kimberley, what are the major risks walking to Manning Falls? (26) In Kalbarri National Park, what are the major risks at the Z-Bend? (27) What are the major risks of camping near the Durack River?
3646 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(28) How many serious incidents have occurred in the last 5 years at the locations in questions 20-27? (29) What was the nature of those incidents? (30) How many hours each day must a tour guide drive on a standard 8 day tour from Perth to Broome? (31) Where in Western Australian National Parks can people be exposed to Crocodolite? (32) Is Crocodolite considered dangerous? (33) Has a tour guide or tour group been threatened by a passenger with a knife in the last ten years? (34) What should a tour guide be aware of before allowing a passenger swim at Turquoise Bay in Cape Range National Park? (35) How many consecutive hours must a tour guide drive to return a bus direct from Broome to Perth? (36) How many hours must a tour guide drive to get from Darwin to Lake Argyle on the first day of a standard 8 day tour from Darwin to Broome? (37) On the next day of such a tour, what is the earliest time a tour guide would arrive in Kurrajong Campsite in Purnululu if they left at 11 am from Lake Argyle, assuming standard stops and no vehicle breakdowns? (38) At Manning Gorge, where is the rock painting closest to the falls and what is the paintings cultural significance? (39) What safety instructions should be given to passengers when sand-boarding at Lancelin or Geraldton? (40) Where is Molly Springs in the Kimberley and how do you get there? (41) If a passenger has a heart attack in Kurrajong Campsite in Purnululu National Park how many hours by road will it take to get to the nearest hospital? (42) Is there any formal requirement for a new tour operator to have any training in risk assessment or knowledge of the above hazards before being allowed to take passengers to the locations in questions 20-41? (43) Considering that the taskforce is/was looking at safety, are the following specific first aid skills required by tour guides operating in remote areas - (a) dealing with a serious spinal injury without medical support for a time period exceeding 24 hours; (b) dealing with post-traumatic stress for a large group of people following a serious event or death without medical support for up to 24 hours; and (c) dealing with multiple passenger injuries without medical support for up to 24 hours? (44) Does the Minister consider the level of tour guide training to be suff0icient? (45) Specifically, how does the Government determine that operators are maintaining compliance with the general conditions in the Tour Operator Handbook? (46) How many operators breached the general conditions of the Tour Operator Handbook in each year for the past 5 years? (47) What is the definition of adventure tourism? (48) What is the definition of remote area in adventure tourism? (49) Why is there only Government bureaucrats on the Adventure Tourism Taskforce? (50) Have any of the members of the Adventure Tourism Taskforce ever conducted a commercial tour in Karijini National Park? (51) If so, which member(s), how many tours have they conducted, when were they conducted and for which tour company? (52) Is there any compulsory accreditation process for tour guides in Western Australia? (53) Is the Cert IV (Tour Guiding) under the AQTF practical enough to meet the needs of the adventure tourism industry? (54) If not, how is the Minister rectifying the situation? (55) Did the Adventure Tourism Taskforce consider safety in the tourism industry outside of National Parks or other reserves?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3647
(56) How much did the report by the Adventure Tourism Taskforce cost? (57) Specifically, was the Tom Price SES or any tour operators consulted or contacted by the Adventure Tourism Taskforce? (58) If so - (a) What was the date(s) the company or SES was contacted; (b) What was the name of the company, guide or peak body; (c) Who was the specific person in the company or SES that was contacted; and (d) Who was the person within the Taskforce that contacted them? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: This information is not readily available. Provision of this information would require considerable research which would divert staff attention away from their normal duties and I am not prepared to allocate the State's resources to provide a response. The Member received a general tourism briefing from Tourism Western Australia's Chief Executive Officer on 6 June 2006. If the Member wishes, I will organise a separate briefing, by Tourism Western Australia, specifically on Adventure Tourism to assist her to refine her questions to be addressed through this Chamber. ACCOMMODATION ON ROTTNEST ISLAND - BOOKINGS 1176. Ms K. Hodson-Thomas to the Minister for Tourism (1) What is the system/process for telephone booking for accommodation at Rottnest Island? (2) Is there a queuing system for telephone calls? (3) If not, why not? (4) What is the average length of waiting time for a call to the reservation system? (5) What is the longest waiting time for ringing the reservation system? (6) Was the length of waiting times on the 1 February 2006? (7) Was the system busier than usual on 1 February 2006? (8) If so, why? (9) Is online booking available for Rottnest? (10) If not, why not? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: (1) Telephone bookings for accommodation at Rottnest Island are made through the Central Reservations Office, open 7 days a week between 9.00am and 4.30pm. Reservations are made on the Opera Property Management System. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable. (4) Waiting times vary depending on several factors including the time of day, day of the week, day of the month, and whether any current promotions are running. (5) The queuing system does not record the longest and shortest waiting time but reports are maintained on the average waiting time over a given period. Waiting times vary depending on several factors including time of day, day of week, day of month, and whether any current promotions are running. (6) The average waiting times were 4 minutes and 51 seconds. (7) Yes. (8) 1 February 2006 was 'Open Day' for accommodation bookings for February 2007. (9) A form of on-line booking is available for accommodation during the ballot period. A full on-line booking facility will be available in July 2007. (10) Not applicable. ROCKINGHAM LAKES REGIONAL PARK 1177. Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (1) During the past twelve months has a proposal been received from a development company to purchase and/or develop land which forms part of Rockingham Lakes Regional Park?
3648 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(2) If a proposal has been received has any indication been given to the development company whether the proposal will be accepted, declined or being looked into? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1) No (2) N/A RAILWAY LINE BETWEEN GREENBUSHES AND BUNBURY INNER HARBOUR 1179. Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (1) When is the upgrade of the Railway Line between Greenbushes and Bunbury Inner Harbour going to commence? (2) When is the upgrade of the Railway Line between Greenbushes and Bunbury Inner Harbour expected to be completed? (3) Once the upgrade has commenced, will the Railway Crossings within the Donnybrook townsite be fixed? (4) When is the construction of the wood chipper in the Bunbury Inner Harbour expected to be completed? (5) When can we expect to see logs and woodchips being carted on the Greenbushes to Bunbury Inner Harbour Railway line? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(5) It is expected to have a final timetable for these matters by the end of the month. GAMBLING - CARD-BASED POKER TOURNAMENTS 1181. Mr A.J. Simpson to the Minister for Racing and Gaming (1) Have you ever received any proposal to alter, or considered any alteration of, Western Australia’s gambling regulations to allow licensed venues to derive an income from card-based poker tournaments? (2) If so, please provide details. Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (1) No. However, the Gaming and Wagering Commission of Western Australia, in March of this year, amended the Gaming Permit conditions to allow charitable or sporting groups, when conducting gaming functions, to charge an entry fee for card-based poker tournaments. (2) Not applicable. GAMBLING - CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM CREDIT CARDS IN GAMBLING FACILITIES 1183. Mr A.J. Simpson to the Minister for Racing and Gaming In relation to the Minister’s answer to question on notice 805, could the Minister please explicitly detail which legislation or regulation prohibits cash withdrawals from credit cards in facilities where gambling products and/or services are supplied? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: Section 24 of the Casino Control Act 1984 and section 109G of the Gaming and Wagering Commission Act 1987.
POLICE - DNA TESTING 1184. Mr A.J. Simpson to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services In reference to Question on Notice 737, could the Minister provide more detailed answers to - (1) What is the average time taken to conduct such tests, from the collection of the sample to the return of results? (2) What is the average time taken to conduct such tests, from the collection of the sample to the return of results for sexual assaults? (3) What is the longest time that such a test has taken? (4) What is the longest time that such a test has taken for cases of sexual assault? (5) How many such tests are pending completion at this time for cases of sexual assault? (6) What is the most number of tests that have been pending at any one time for sexual assault?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3649
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(6) Testing of forensic samples is done by PathWest which falls within the jurisdiction of the Minister for Health. Police do not record the statistics requested. URANIUM MINING - GOVERNMENT POLICY 1185. Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister for the Environment (1) Is it the Government’s position that uranium mining in Western Australia should be banned on environmental grounds, and if so why? (2) Does the Minister respect the right of sovereign nations to choose nuclear power as a way of addressing their greenhouse gas footprint? (a) If not, why not? (3) Can the Minister advise what is the extent of Western Australia’s current known uranium reserves and what is the estimated reserves? (4) Does the Minister recognise that the export of uranium does not necessitate Western Australia having to receive nuclear waste? (a) If not, why not? (5) Does the Minister concede that restrictions in production and subsequent higher prices of uranium will affect the economic feasibility of nuclear energy in some sovereign States? (6) How much of the world’s estimated uranium reserves does Australia have? (7) How much of the world’s estimated uranium reserves does Western Australia have? (8) Does the Minister recognise that Western Australia’s resource boom is largely driven by the export of minerals and energy? (a) If not, why not? (9) Does the Minister concede that nuclear energy may be a suitable choice for China and India to address their energy demands in a carbon constrained world? (a) If not, why not? (10) Does the Minister concede that without a suitable energy source China and India’s rapid economic growth will be restricted? (a) If not, why not? (11) Does the Minister concede that democratic reforms are linked to economic prosperity within China? (a) If not, why not? (12) Does the Minister concede that without the use of a clean energy source China is likely to become the largest greenhouse gas emitters in the world? (a) If not, why not? (13) What are the direct greenhouse gas emissions per unit of energy produced from nuclear power, coal and liquefied natural gas? (14) What were Western Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions for each year for the past 5 years? (15) What percentage of Western Australia’s energy mix will come from renewable energy in the next 20 years? (16) What major energy source in Western Australia produces the most greenhouse gases per unit of energy produced? (17) Is the State Government still committed to the Kyoto Protocol? (18) What is Western Australia’s Kyoto target for 2006? (19) Will Western Australia meet that target? (20) Does the Minister support comments made on page 21 on the WA Greenhouse Strategy that Western Australia is not going to meet its targets by the end of the first Kyoto Accounting Period? (a) If not, why not? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: The Minister for the Environment has provided the following response:
3650 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(1) The Government's position on uranium mining is based on environmental and social grounds. (2) (a) The Government of Western Australia has no jurisdiction over sovereign nations. (3) Refer to the Hon J Bowler, Minister for Resources. (4) (a) Yes. (5)-(7) Refer to the Hon J Bowler, Minister for Resources. (8) (a) Refer to the Hon J Bowler, Minister for Resources. (9)-(12) These are a matter for those nations. (13) The greenhouse gas emissions per unit of energy produced in relation to coal (Collie) is 93.8kg of carbon dioxide per gigajoule, LNG (liquefied natural gas) is 52.4kg of CO2 per gigajoule. The Western Australian Office of Energy does not have figures for nuclear energy as none is produced in the State. (Figures are from Energy Western Australia published 2003 by the WA Office of Energy) (14) Figures detailing Western Australia's greenhouse gas emissions for the past five years are not available. The latest figures provided by the Australian Greenhouse Office are for 2004. As indicated in the Western Australian Greenhouse Strategy, Western Australia's total net emissions for 1990, 1995 and 2002 were 62.8 mega tonnes, 61.7 mega tonnes and 70.4 mega tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents respectively. The decrease in net emissions between 1990 and 1995 was due to the land management sector changing from being a net emitter of greenhouse gas emissions, mainly because of land clearing for agriculture, to a net sink of greenhouse gas emissions, due to carbon sequestration by tree plantations. On 23 May 2006 the Australian Greenhouse Office released the 2004 National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (NGGI) which provides the most recent estimates of greenhouse gas emissions for Australia and for each State and Territory. Greenhouse gas emissions were estimated to be 68.5 Mt in Western Australia in 2004, approximately 12% of the national figure. Western Australia's greenhouse gas emissions have continued to rise against the 1990 baseline year, but have continued to be offset by changes in land use (mostly due to significant reductions in land clearing and the conversion of cleared agricultural land into timber plantations). In 2004 Western Australian greenhouse gas emissions increased by approximately 19.5% over the baseline year with the offset from changes in land use included. (15) Refer to Hon F Logan, Minister for Energy. (16) Coal. (17) The Kyoto Protocol forms part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Under the Australian Constitution, the Commonwealth Government has the specific powers for external affairs. However, the Western Australian Government's position regarding the Kyoto Protocol is clearly set out in the 'Western Australian Greenhouse Strategy' (September 2004). (18)-(19) There are no targets for Greenhouse Gas emissions for Australian States and Territories. (20) (a) There are no Western Australian targets discussed on page 21 of the 'Western Australian Greenhouse Strategy'. Rather, Western Australia's projected greenhouse gas emissions are compared with Australia's national target.
LIQUOR LICENSING REFORM 1186. Mr J.E. McGrath to the Minister for Racing and Gaming (1) Has the proposed liquor licensing reform bill been drafted? (2) If not - (a) what stage is it at; (b) when will it be completed; and (c) when will it be released to the Opposition? (3) If it has been drafted will the Minister give a copy to the Opposition and stakeholders for the sake of open and transparent consultation?
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3651
(4) What will the limit be for the number of persons allowed in a small bar licence? (5) What will the floor area limit be for a small bar licence? (6) What will be the cost be to obtain a small bar licence? (7) What specific health regulations (number of toilets, kitchen cleanliness etc) will be required for a small bar licence? (8) How much did the Allen Consulting Group Report to the Department of Racing, Gaming & Liquor cost? (9) What incentive or benefit will exist for potential licensees to choose a small bar licence over a tavern license? (10) What will be the process for the nomination of additional approved managers? (11) How much will that process cost? (12) Will small bar licences have to provide meals? (13) Will small bar licences be allowed to sell packaged liquor? (14) What will the permissible hours of trade be for a small bar licence? (15) What is the technical difference between a restaurant and a small bar licence? (16) What is the technical difference between a restaurant and a tavern licence? (17) What is the technical difference between a small bar licence and a tavern licence? (18) What technical safeguards are in place to stop restaurants in quiet suburban area’s from serving 95% of patrons with alcohol without a meal? (19) What technical criteria will be used to determine the difference between a “restaurant that wants to operate more as a bar than a restaurant”? (20) Will restaurants be a category A or category B licence? (21) Have Category A and Category B licences been abolished? (22) How long will Responsible Service Alcohol (RSA) training take? (23) How much will RSA training cost? (24) Will approved managers be required to undertake the proposed RSA training? (25) Under the proposed changes will approved managers have to complete more detailed RSA training? (26) If so, how long will it take and how much will it cost? (27) What is the proposed number of dedicated police and liquor inspectors dedicated to scrutinise the changes in liquor licensing legislation? (28) What is the additional funding allocated to police and liquor inspectors to scrutinise the changes in liquor licensing legislation? (29) How many court cases have been fought between a Government Department and a liquor licensee’s in the last 5 years? (30) For each of the above cases: (a) What was the Government Department? (b) How much money was spent as a result of that action by the Department? (c) What was the reason for the case? (d) What is the name of the other party involved? (31) What decision making influence will licensees have on how monies are spent from the proposed security pool? (32) Will administration costs for any security pool come out of licensee contributions? (33) If so, how much or what percentage? (34) Will any administration costs for any security pool come out of the Department’s funding? (35) If so, how much will those costs be and how much additional funding will be given to the Department? (36) Will licensees/approved managers be required to conduct a probity check?
3652 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(37) Will a licensee be required to keep a probity register of staff and volunteers? (38) How many different registers/lists will a licensee have to keep under the proposed changes? (39) How many prosecutions for the sale of alcohol to an intoxicated person have failed on the grounds of the definition in the last 5 years? (40) How many clubs were reprimanded or prosecuted for exceeding the number of non-member extended trading permits for each financial year for the last 5 years? (41) How many licences are there in Western Australia for each license type? (42) Does the Government expect this number to change significantly after the introduction of the proposed changes? (43) Can the Minister give the forecast or expected number of each licence types after the proposed changes? (44) Did the Minister conduct a regulatory Statements which specifically assessed the cost/benefit of the proposed legislation to ensure change did not unduly impact or have unintended consequences for small business? (45) If not, why not? (46) If so, will the Minister be making the study public? (47) What will be the minimum criteria for people to undertake Responsible Service of Alcohol (RSA) training? (48) Will volunteers be required to undertake RSA training? (49) Will only registered training providers be able to provide RSA training? (50) How will people that serve alcohol undertake RSA training if they are hundreds of kilometres away from a registered training provider? (51) Will people already serving alcohol have to undertake RSA training? (52) Is there a grace period for existing employee’s/volunteer’s to get RSA training? (53) If so, how long? (54) For what length of time can someone be serving alcohol before they must complete RSA training or must someone have completed RSA training before commencement of service of alcohol? (55) If the Government is going to allow restaurants to serve alcohol without a meal why is it necessary to define “meal” in the legislation? (56) What is the definition of ‘cutlery’? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (1)-(7) While the details to the extent sought by the member cannot be finalised until the drafting of the amendment Bill is completed, the legislation will be drafted in accordance with the proposed changes to the Liquor Licensing Act 1988 announced by the Government on 28 March of this year. The Government anticipates introducing the package of amendments into the Parliament during the Spring session with the intention of the reforms taking effect in 2007; members will be given ample opportunity to debate the Amendment Bill at this time. An explanation of the reforms, together with a series of fact sheets providing more detail of the reforms, was forwarded to each member of Parliament and is available on the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor's website - www.rgl.wa.gov.au Answers to some of the questions are contained in this explanatory material and the member was also afforded the opportunity for a briefing on the Government's proposed reforms. The following answers are provided to the questions relating only to the accountability of the Director General of the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor for the administration of the Liquor Licensing Act 1988. (8) $33,563.13 (net of GST). (9)-(28) See answer (1)-(7) (29) 34.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3653
(30) (a) Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. (b) Based on invoices received to date from the State Solicitor's Office for the last five financial years - $92,033. (c) Disciplinary matters under section 95 of the Liquor Licensing Act. (d) Oakover Vineyards Pty Ltd Kevin Robert Mann, Midchime Pty Ltd Pure Profit Pty Ltd trading as The Firm Anton Bichler, The Conglomerate Hotel Robert Mervyn Sellen, John Patrick O'Connor Bianchi Corporation Pty Ltd trading as Savoia Quaffers Midland Dorigo Pty Ltd Quelson Pty Ltd trading as The Flying Scotsman Morocodian Pty Ltd trading as Colliefields Hotel Nomotutama Niue Kuti Abraham Saffron Bename Pty Ltd trading as Halls Head Tavern Grant Michael Taylor, Boyup Brook Hotel Giovanni Papalia, Modra Bay Tavern West Valley 2000 Pty Ltd, Bell House Cafe Wendy Irene Hill, Rocky Gully Pub Denise Ellen Spencer, Christopher Joseph Burleigh, Freemasons Tavern Beverley Colin Bryan Cooper, The Printers Pie Ronald Gilbert Davis, Rocky Bay Inc. Kireen Nominees Pty Ltd trading as The Kimberley Hotel Hungry Hollow Tavern Bunbury Raymond James Saw, Piccadilly Hotel Rendezvous Hotels Management Pty Ltd Explorer Cruise Lines Pty Ltd Trebanor Pty Ltd, Mount Helena Tavern Alan David Alford, Lake Yealering Hotel Richard John Keays, Rebel Entertainment Pty Ltd, Club Capitol Hedley William Anderson, Viewtown Pty Ltd. Nicola Lee Worthing, Castle Hotel Julie Thelma Taylor Inkcot Pty Ltd, John Van Stroe Allan William Albion Gerard Cherian, The Sapphire Bar (31-(38) See answer (1-7) (39) Nil. However, in accordance with section 155 of the Liquor Licensing Act, general enforcement of the provisions of the Act, including breaches of section 115, is the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police. (40) Clubs are not "reprimanded or prosecuted for exceeding the number of non-member extended trading permits". Over the past five financial years, on only one occasion was the limit of four extended trading permits for non-member functions exceeded. (41) As at the 30 April 2006 - Hotels/Taverns 621 Hotel Restricted 38 Liquor Stores 478 Restaurants 709 Clubs 418 Club Restricted 518 Cabarets 52 Special Facilities 491 Wholesalers 173 Producers 540 Casino 1
3654 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(42)-(56) See answer (1-7) TOUR OPERATORS IN NATIONAL PARKS AND RESERVES - POSSESSION OF FIRST AID CERTIFICATES AND RADIOS OR SATELLITE PHONES 1187. Ms K. Hodson-Thomas to the Minister for Tourism (1) How many tour guides operating in National Parks or reserves were checked to see if their first aid certificates were current in each year for the last 5 years? (2) What was the process for checking those first aid qualifications? (3) How many were found not to have current first aid certificates? (4) Other than during vehicle inspections, how many tour guides operating in remote National Parks were checked to see if they had a functioning high frequency radio or satellite phone in each year for the last 5 years? (5) What was the process for checking the high frequency radio or satellite phone requirements? (6) How many were found not to have a functional high frequency radio or satellite phone? (7) Is it a requirement for a tour guide to carry a satellite phone in remote areas if operating away from a tour vehicle? (8) How many deaths involving a tourist on an organised adventure tourism holiday are currently before the Coroner? (9) How many tour operators have been prosecuted for a breach of their licence conditions for each year in the last 5 years? (10) What was the name of the operator(s) and what were the offence(s)? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: This information is not readily available. Provision of this information would require considerable research which would divert staff attention away from their normal duties and I am not prepared to allocate the State's resources to provide a response. The Member received a general tourism briefing from Tourism Western Australia's Chief Executive Officer on 6 June 2006. If the Member wishes, I will organise a separate briefing, by Tourism Western Australia, specifically on Adventure Tourism to assist her to refine her questions to be addressed through this Chamber. GOVERNMENT’S MAJOR TOURISM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIORITIES 1188. Ms K. Hodson-Thomas to the Minister for Tourism (1) Given the role of the Minister in developing the tourism industry and the Opposition’s role in scrutinising the Minister’s performance, why can’t the Minister identify the major tourism infrastructure projects planned for the next 2 years? (2) Given the role of the Minister in developing the tourism industry and the Opposition’s role in scrutinising the Minister’s performance, why can’t the Minister identify the major tourism infrastructure priorities for Western Australia? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: (1)-(2) Tourism Western Australia's Tourism Accommodation Development Register (TADR) contains this information and is publicly available on westernaustralia.com under the planning and development section. It summarises private tourism infrastructure developments throughout Western Australia which are in the planning or construction phase. As at December 2005, there were 111 tourism accommodation developments in the planning stage totalling $967.9 million and 56 developments under construction totalling $266.7 million. Major projects which developers advise Tourism Western Australia are planned in the coming 18 months to two years include: Under construction; • Medina Executive Barrack Plaza Hotel, Perth - 100 room, 4 star hotel $25 million, • Peninsula Hotel Redevelopment, Mandurah - 120 room, 4 star hotel, $25 million, • The Frangipani, Broome - 62 room, self contained apartments, $12 million, Commencing in second half of 2006; • Outrigger Hotel, Bunbury - 207 units, $80 million, • Ningaloo Hilton, Coral Bay - 130 room 5 star hotel, $56 million,
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3655
• Abbey Farm Hilton, Yallingup - 156 suites, $52 million, • Tropicana Inn, Broome - addition of 225 rooms, $30 million, • Abrolhos Island Tourist Accommodation - 20 unit lodge, $12 million, • Savannah Campground, Karijini National Park - addition of 35 tented cabins and 54 sites, $3.7 million, • Karma Hotel, Margaret River - 12 5 star chalets, $17 million, • Elan Riverside Pier Hotel, Perth - 86 rooms, $15 million. Commencing in first half of 2007; • Caves House, Yallingup - addition of 36 units, $20 million, • Eco Beach, Broome - 80 eco cabins and safari tents, $5 million. Tourism Western Australia's Landbank initiative has been created to ensure that there is adequate supply of tourism development sites to meet the future needs of the tourism industry in Western Australia. The aim of the Landbank initiative is to make identified tourism sites 'investor ready' by streamlining the approvals processes required for tourism development to occur. Developers will be asked to submit detailed design proposals for these important tourism sites. Development is expected to be completed within three years. Tourism Western Australia is planning to release 20 Landbank sites by 2010. The developments will vary from luxury resorts to caravan parks and wilderness lodges. Investment attraction strategies have been developed to promote these sites to tourism developers in Western Australia, interstate and overseas. Tourism Western Australia has developed Destination Development Strategies (DDS) for WA's five tourism regions that are also publicly available on westernaustralia.com under the planning and development section. The DDS's outline strategies to address gaps in infrastructure, attractions, accommodation and other tourism facilities, with the objective to maximise Western Australia's iconic tourism experiences, increase visitation and disperse visitors and associated economic benefits to all parts of a tourism region. The DDS's formed the basis for Tourism Western Australia's submission to the State Infrastructure Strategy. Tourism Western Australia's submission summarises the tourism industry's key public infrastructure priorities for the coming 20 years, covering key infrastructure requirements such as airports, roads and marine infrastructure, utility provision, community infrastructure, and education and training. Priorities have been ranked according to the ability of public infrastructure projects to facilitate private investment in our existing high priority and emerging tourism destinations, create new experiences with high domestic and international appeal, achieve strong economic, social and environmental outcomes, improve current visitor satisfaction and address areas of market failure. See tabled paper relating to the top 10 infrastructure projects priorities that will facilitate tourism development in Western Australia. [See paper 1577.] LIQUOR LICENSING COURT - DETAILS OF CASES AND APPEALS 1189. Mr J.E. McGrath to the Attorney General; Health; Electoral Affairs (1) How many court cases does the Director for Public Health or the Health Department currently have in the Liquor Licensing Court? (2) Who are the licensees involved in those cases? (3) How many court cases has the Director for Public Health or the Health Department had in the Liquor Licensing Court in each year for the past 5 years? (4) For each of those cases - (a) what was the outcome? (b) who were the licensees involved? (c) what was nature of the case? (d) how much did the case cost the Government? (5) Is the Director of Public Health, State Solicitor or the Health Department currently pursuing or has pursued in the last 12 months any appeals in the Supreme Court against decisions by the Liquor Licensing Court regarding the approval of extended trading permits for Sunday Trading? (6) Was the Director of Public Health or the State Solicitor approached by any of the licensees involved seeking an adjournment of the case until after the outcome of the Government’s proposed liquor reforms?
3656 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006]
(7) Does the Department consider such appeals to be a ‘waste’ of taxpayers’ money given the proposed liquor licensing reforms will allow Sunday trading of liquor in the metropolitan area? If not, why not? (8) Will the Attorney General put an immediate halt to these cases pending the outcome of the proposed legislation reforms? (9) Has the Attorney General informed the Minister for Racing and Gaming of the appeals being pursued in the Supreme Court and if so when was he first informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) The Executive Director, Public Health, has intervened in two applications that are currently before the Liquor Licensing Court. (2) The licensees are: Temregal Pty Ltd; and Maywood Holdings Pty Ltd. (3) The number of applications dealt with by the Liquor Licensing Court in which the Executive Director, Public Health, has intervened over the past 5 years is as follows: 2001 - 10 2002 - 4 2003 - 3 2004 - 5 2005 - 2 (4) See attached [See paper 1578.] (5) The Executive Director, Public Health, is appealing against two decisions of the Liquor Licensing Court to grant extended trading permits. (6) Yes. (7) No. Under the current Act, the Executive Director, Public Health, is given authority to intervene in proceedings before the licensing authority regarding the harm or ill-health caused by the use of liquor, and the minimization of that harm or ill-health. It would be inappropriate for the Executive Director, Public Health, to anticipate a future decision of Parliament in respect to any changed legislation. In the current cases, the basis of appeal is the question of the considerations that should be taken into account in determining applications for Extended Trading Permits under the Liquor Licensing Act. The judgment of the court will assist the Executive Director, Public Health, in making future decisions relating to potential interventions and may also influence the drafting of any proposed legislative changes. (8)-(9) No. ILLEGAL DUMPING OF WASTE NEAR KARRATHA - INVESTIGATION 1190. Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister for the Environment I refer the minister to the recent dumping of a large quantity of a controlled waist product “toxic sludge” on a road verge near Karratha in April 2006. The full details are outlined in a press article from the Pilbara News of 3 May 2006. (1) Will the Minister advise what action has been taken by his Department to identify and prosecute the perpetrators of this illegal waste dumping activity? (2) Will the Minister advise what steps are in place to rehabilitate the other 10 illegal waste dump sites identified in the area. Mr M. McGOWAN replied: The Minister for the Environment has provided the following response: (1) The site has been remediated. Investigations to determine the source and exact nature of the dumped material remain ongoing. The results of the investigation will be assessed and appropriate follow-up action determined in accordance with the Department's Prosecution and Enforcement policy. (2) One other apparent spill site has been revealed to date and investigations into this site will be carried out as part of the overall investigation of the incident in question. REVIEW OF ADVENTURE TOURISM VISITOR SAFETY IN WA - MINISTERIAL TASK FORCE 1191. Ms K. Hodson-Thomas to the Minister for Tourism I refer to the Minister’s response to Question on Notice No. 847(5) that the Adventure Tourism Taskforce had indeed contacted the major adventure tourism companies that operated in Karijini National Park.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3657
(1) Will the Minister advise what was - (a) the names of the specific companies that were contacted; (b) what dates were those companies contacted; (c) who was the specific person spoken to within each company; (d) who was the specific person within the Taskforce that contacted the company; and (e) what safety concerns did the company discuss? (2) Did the Taskforce actually contact any tour companies regarding visitor safety by telephone? If so, which companies and on what date? (3) If not, why not? (4) Did the Taskforce actually write any letters or emails to tour companies seeking their input on visitor safety? If so, which companies and on what date? (5) If not, why not? (6) Given the Taskforce is reporting on the safety of adventure tourist’s and the highly specialised nature of the industry, why was it considered a potential conflict of interest to have any tourism operators, guides or peak industry bodies on the Taskforce? (7) How did the Government hope to understand the complexities of this specialised industry and the associated risks to visitor safety without any tour operators, guides or peak industry bodies represented on the Taskforce? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: This information is not readily available. Provision of this information would require considerable research which would divert staff attention away from their normal duties and I am not prepared to allocate the State's resources to provide a response. The Member received a general tourism briefing from Tourism Western Australia's Chief Executive Officer on 6 June 2006. If the Member wishes, I will organise a separate briefing, by Tourism Western Australia, specifically on Adventure Tourism to assist her to refine her questions to be addressed through this Chamber. KALAMUNDA DISTRICT COMMUNITY HOSPITAL - PROVISION OF SERVICES BY SPECIALISTS 1194. Mr J.H.D. Day to the Minister for Health With reference to the provision of services at Kalamunda District Community Hospital, I ask - (1) Have any specialists ceased providing services at the Hospital? (2) If yes, which specialists, what is their specialty, and why? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Yes. (2) In the past 6 months: Dr Bruce Thyer, Gynaecology. No reason given. Dr Graham Clarke, General Surgery. No reason given. All specialist sessions have been replaced. AUTISM AND ASPERGER’S SYNDROME - WAITING TIME FOR ASSESSMENT 1198. Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister for Health (1) What is average waiting time for patient assessment from the Autistic Aspergers Board? (2) What is the reason for that waiting period? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: I would recommend that this question be directed to the responsible Minister, the Minister for Disability Services.
REPLACEMENT OF WOODEN POWER POLES AND FUNDING FOR UNDERGROUND POWER PROGRAM 1199. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Energy The State budget has highlighted the fact that Western Power’s ageing electricity distribution infrastructure (particularly in respect of wooden pole type overhead power lines) has become an increasing concern due to the
3658 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] potential risk it poses to public, stock and property safety (See Page 932 Employment Protection of the budget) and I ask - (1) How many wooden power poles are of concern within the metropolitan area? (2) How many wooden power poles are of concern across the State? (3) What has been done to address the risk that the wooden power poles pose? (4) What funding has been allocated to replace the wooden power poles of concern and over what period would that money be spent? (5) What will the wooden power poles be replaced with? (6) When will the State Government increase the funding for the underground power program so that all above ground power poles can be eliminated completely? (7) An additional $3.1 million has been allocated in the budget to provide underground power for Port Headland to increase reliability due to the town’s vulnerability to cyclones. Are any other funding allocations being considered to provide underground power for other north-west towns in the cyclone belt? If so, what towns and what amounts of money are being considered and when would those amounts be provided? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy has provided the following response: (1) A number of poles are identified for replacement each year, following routine inspections. In the metropolitan area, approximately 1450 wood poles have been identified for replacement. A further 1188 poles have been identified as requiring further testing and assessment. (2) In the remaining areas of the South West Interconnected System (SWIS), approximately 1072 poles have been identified as needing replacement and 793 for further testing and assessment. There are approximately 600,000 wooden poles in total in the SWIS. (3) Western Power inspects wood poles periodically to check their condition and to chemically treat them against rot and white ants. If necessary, the poles are scheduled for reinforcement or replacement. This is in line with common industry practice across Australia. This financial year (to the end of April 2006) 1672 poles have been replaced. (4) A total of $14 M has been allocated over the next three financial years for the replacement of poles. (5) In the short term, new wooden poles will continue to be used to replace old poles. However, in the near future steel poles may be used in extreme, high and moderate fire risk areas as an alternative to wood poles. Investigations are presently in progress into the issues related to touch voltage (electric shock) hazards associated with using steel poles. This issue is the only barrier remaining to be resolved before starting to use steel poles. Composite (synthetic) poles are also being investigated as an alternative to wood poles. Of particular concern at the present time is the fire resistance capability and high cost. There appears to be potential to use composite poles in the network in the future. (6) The Underground Power Program receives $20 million dollars annually to retrospectively install underground power in areas with existing overhead power lines. This is part of the Government's overall commitment to improving the standard of the electricity supply to consumers by addressing network reliability issues. As part of its 2006/07 Budget, the Government increased the level of funding to the Underground Power Program by an additional $10 million in 2006/07 to enable an acceleration of work on the remaining Round Three projects and to commence the first Round Four projects in early 2007. At this stage, the Government has no plans for any further increases in funding to the Program. Western Power has advised that at the current rate of new and retrospective underground power activities, it expects to achieve the goal of having 50% of Perth homes supplied by underground power by 2010. Undergrounding all of the remaining 390,000 overhead connections in the metropolitan area would be an enormous undertaking, costing approximately $3.2 billion in today's prices. It is estimated that at least a further $2 billion would be required to provide underground power to about 170,000 overhead connections outside the metropolitan area. The rate at which this could be achieved is unknown as it would depend on the availability of the required labour and materials over time. It should also be noted that in some areas, such as the Perth Hills, installing underground power would be cost-prohibitive, mostly due to the rocky terrain and these factors are not fully reflected in these estimates.
[ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 13 June 2006] 3659
(7) The Government considers funding allocations in the budget process. VERVE ENERGY - OPERATION OF MUJA A AND B GENERATION PLANTS 1207. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan to the Minister for Energy (1) Has Verve Energy made a definite decision on the last date for operation of Muja A and B generation plants? (2) What is that date? (3) Is that date binding on the Generator? (4) If no date has been set, why not? (5) Does Verve have any plans to refurbish the units or is it considering any proposals from third parties for that purpose? (6) If so what is the name of that third party? (7) What is the latest date to which the units are licensed to operate? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: The Minister for Energy has provided the following response: (1) No, however, no later than 30 April 2007. (2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable, please refer to part (7). (4) Exact date to be established to meet operating and electricity system security needs. (5) Verve Energy has no plans to refurbish the units and is considering the best way to dispose of the power station. (6) Not applicable. (7) 30 April 2007. ______