❓ Hon Colin de Grussa questions the Minister for Agriculture and Food regarding funding for the Esperance extension of the State Barrier Fence, wild dog management responsibility, and the use of departmental underspend. The Minister responds by highlighting ongoing state government investment, appeal processes, native title considerations, and criticizes the federal government's funding approach.
AnsweredQoN 1232Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
STATE BARRIER FENCE —
ESPERANCE EXTENSION
1232. Hon COLIN de GRUSSA to the Minister for Agriculture and
Food:
I refer to Environmental Protection
Authority report 1626, ''State Barrier Fence Esperance Extension'',
released on 26 November, which concludes that the proposal is environmentally
acceptable and therefore recommends that the proposal may be implemented.
(1) Will the
minister now release the funds held for this project in order to allow the
commencement of work on this critical infrastructure project, pending the
Minister for Environment's final recommendation?
(2) Will the
minister acknowledge that management of wild dogs is a state responsibility and
should be funded by the state government?
(3) Given the $60
million underspend identified in the Department of Primary Industries and
Regional Development 2017–18 annual report, will the minister commit to
using a proportion of this underspend to complete the Esperance extension of
the state barrier fence?
ESPERANCE EXTENSION
1232. Hon COLIN de GRUSSA to the Minister for Agriculture and
Food:
I refer to Environmental Protection
Authority report 1626, ''State Barrier Fence Esperance Extension'',
released on 26 November, which concludes that the proposal is environmentally
acceptable and therefore recommends that the proposal may be implemented.
(1) Will the
minister now release the funds held for this project in order to allow the
commencement of work on this critical infrastructure project, pending the
Minister for Environment's final recommendation?
(2) Will the
minister acknowledge that management of wild dogs is a state responsibility and
should be funded by the state government?
(3) Given the $60
million underspend identified in the Department of Primary Industries and
Regional Development 2017–18 annual report, will the minister commit to
using a proportion of this underspend to complete the Esperance extension of
the state barrier fence?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question.
(1)–(3) I
have to say, member, that many assumptions built into these questions are
simply wrong. The first is that we have not been proceeding to spend money on
this project. I think it is important for the member to note that the state
government has funded the comprehensive planning and approval process. As the
member is no doubt aware, we have a statement from the Environmental Protection
Authority that there is an appeal period of some two weeks and then the
question of whether we can proceed will depend on whether there are appeals,
and how those appeals are resolved. It is still some way away in that regard. I
also point out to the member that much of the fence alignment—work has
been done to minimise this—goes through native title land and we need
to resolve the future act processes before we can get underway.
I point out to the member that he has
fallen into the trap that so many others have of accepting the nonsense of the
federal government. The federal government funds, and has funded over many
years, a very considerable amount of the dog fencing in Queensland. Queensland
has basically abandoned its state barrier fence and put its money into cell
fences. The federal government will not do it here because it says, ''You've
kept your state barrier fence going, so we're not going to support your
state barrier fence. We only support cell fencing.'' That is one of the
many, many econometric disadvantages that Western Australia suffers. The
federal government looks at the reality in the eastern states, sets the policy
in accordance with the structures of the eastern states, and then says, ''Sorry,
you miss out because you don't fit within the criteria.''
I would expect Hon Colin de Grussa to
stand up for Western Australia in this regard. We are asking only a very, very modest amount. We are putting $6.9 million
into this fence and we are asking our friends in the commonwealth
government for only $2.5 million, but on the basis of the Victorian state
election result, I suspect that in a few months' time we will probably
have a much more Western Australian–friendly federal government and we
will try again at that point.
(1)–(3) I
have to say, member, that many assumptions built into these questions are
simply wrong. The first is that we have not been proceeding to spend money on
this project. I think it is important for the member to note that the state
government has funded the comprehensive planning and approval process. As the
member is no doubt aware, we have a statement from the Environmental Protection
Authority that there is an appeal period of some two weeks and then the
question of whether we can proceed will depend on whether there are appeals,
and how those appeals are resolved. It is still some way away in that regard. I
also point out to the member that much of the fence alignment—work has
been done to minimise this—goes through native title land and we need
to resolve the future act processes before we can get underway.
I point out to the member that he has
fallen into the trap that so many others have of accepting the nonsense of the
federal government. The federal government funds, and has funded over many
years, a very considerable amount of the dog fencing in Queensland. Queensland
has basically abandoned its state barrier fence and put its money into cell
fences. The federal government will not do it here because it says, ''You've
kept your state barrier fence going, so we're not going to support your
state barrier fence. We only support cell fencing.'' That is one of the
many, many econometric disadvantages that Western Australia suffers. The
federal government looks at the reality in the eastern states, sets the policy
in accordance with the structures of the eastern states, and then says, ''Sorry,
you miss out because you don't fit within the criteria.''
I would expect Hon Colin de Grussa to
stand up for Western Australia in this regard. We are asking only a very, very modest amount. We are putting $6.9 million
into this fence and we are asking our friends in the commonwealth
government for only $2.5 million, but on the basis of the Victorian state
election result, I suspect that in a few months' time we will probably
have a much more Western Australian–friendly federal government and we
will try again at that point.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.