Mr. Ripper questions Premier Barnett about potential financial liabilities related to the Oakajee project, specifically regarding the state's obligation to purchase intellectual property if the project fails. Barnett maintains it's an option, not a mandatory obligation, and expresses confidence in the project's success.

AnsweredQoN 196Legislative Assembly
Asked
7 April 2011
Portfolio
Premier

QuestionView source ↗

Oakajee Agreement — Financial Liabilities
I refer to the state development agreement regarding the Oakajee project and the evidence given to the Public Accounts Committee yesterday by the government’s own Director General of the Department of State Development. (1) Is what the Premier calls an option to purchase intellectual property in the event that that agreement does not proceed, a state obligation that is mandatory in certain circumstances? (2) Why did the Premier not tell the truth when I asked him about this in the house? (3) Will the Premier now reveal the full extent of the state’s obligations if this Oakajee project does not proceed? Mr C.J. BARNETT

AnswerView source ↗

(1)–(3) When the state development agreement was negotiated—that is not the state agreement; there is a difference—we went to great pains to ensure that, should Oakajee Port and Rail not proceed with the project, the intellectual property could be purchased by the state, and that the state has that option. I do not expect that that circumstance will arise, but we would certainly protect the state’s interests, given that the state has, in a sense, contributed. That intellectual property could include designs that the state has contributed through policy input and specifications on design reports. It could also include work done on environmental assessments, tidal movement, wave-height monitoring and the like. In fact, a lot of that data was collected by the state in the 1990s and has now been updated. That is the situation — Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. The SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition! Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.
(1) Is what the Premier calls an option to purchase intellectual property in the event that that agreement does not proceed, a state obligation that is mandatory in certain circumstances? (2) Why did the Premier not tell the truth when I asked him about this in the house? (3) Will the Premier now reveal the full extent of the state’s obligations if this Oakajee project does not proceed? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) When the state development agreement was negotiated—that is not the state agreement; there is a difference—we went to great pains to ensure that, should Oakajee Port and Rail not proceed with the project, the intellectual property could be purchased by the state, and that the state has that option. I do not expect that that circumstance will arise, but we would certainly protect the state’s interests, given that the state has, in a sense, contributed. That intellectual property could include designs that the state has contributed through policy input and specifications on design reports. It could also include work done on environmental assessments, tidal movement, wave-height monitoring and the like. In fact, a lot of that data was collected by the state in the 1990s and has now been updated. That is the situation — Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. The SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition! Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.
(2) Why did the Premier not tell the truth when I asked him about this in the house? (3) Will the Premier now reveal the full extent of the state’s obligations if this Oakajee project does not proceed? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) When the state development agreement was negotiated—that is not the state agreement; there is a difference—we went to great pains to ensure that, should Oakajee Port and Rail not proceed with the project, the intellectual property could be purchased by the state, and that the state has that option. I do not expect that that circumstance will arise, but we would certainly protect the state’s interests, given that the state has, in a sense, contributed. That intellectual property could include designs that the state has contributed through policy input and specifications on design reports. It could also include work done on environmental assessments, tidal movement, wave-height monitoring and the like. In fact, a lot of that data was collected by the state in the 1990s and has now been updated. That is the situation — Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. The SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition! Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.
(3) Will the Premier now reveal the full extent of the state’s obligations if this Oakajee project does not proceed? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) When the state development agreement was negotiated—that is not the state agreement; there is a difference—we went to great pains to ensure that, should Oakajee Port and Rail not proceed with the project, the intellectual property could be purchased by the state, and that the state has that option. I do not expect that that circumstance will arise, but we would certainly protect the state’s interests, given that the state has, in a sense, contributed. That intellectual property could include designs that the state has contributed through policy input and specifications on design reports. It could also include work done on environmental assessments, tidal movement, wave-height monitoring and the like. In fact, a lot of that data was collected by the state in the 1990s and has now been updated. That is the situation — Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. The SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition! Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.
Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) When the state development agreement was negotiated—that is not the state agreement; there is a difference—we went to great pains to ensure that, should Oakajee Port and Rail not proceed with the project, the intellectual property could be purchased by the state, and that the state has that option. I do not expect that that circumstance will arise, but we would certainly protect the state’s interests, given that the state has, in a sense, contributed. That intellectual property could include designs that the state has contributed through policy input and specifications on design reports. It could also include work done on environmental assessments, tidal movement, wave-height monitoring and the like. In fact, a lot of that data was collected by the state in the 1990s and has now been updated. That is the situation — Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. The SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition! Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.
(1)–(3) When the state development agreement was negotiated—that is not the state agreement; there is a difference—we went to great pains to ensure that, should Oakajee Port and Rail not proceed with the project, the intellectual property could be purchased by the state, and that the state has that option. I do not expect that that circumstance will arise, but we would certainly protect the state’s interests, given that the state has, in a sense, contributed. That intellectual property could include designs that the state has contributed through policy input and specifications on design reports. It could also include work done on environmental assessments, tidal movement, wave-height monitoring and the like. In fact, a lot of that data was collected by the state in the 1990s and has now been updated. That is the situation — Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. The SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition! Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.
Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. The SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition! Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.
The SPEAKER : Leader of the Opposition! Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : As I have said on numerous occasions, I am confident that the Oakajee project will go ahead and will become part of a state agreement bill that will come before this Parliament in all its detail.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more