A parliamentary question regarding the Premier's defamatory statements about Clive Palmer and the associated legal costs, questioning the benefits to WA taxpayers and the link to saving $30 billion. The answer defends the Premier's actions as necessary to protect the state from Palmer's legal challenges.

AnsweredQoN 96Legislative Council
Asked
21 February 2023
Portfolio
Leader of the House representing the Premier

QuestionView source ↗

CLIVE PALMER —
LEGAL ACTION
96. Hon JAMES HAYWARD to the Leader of the House
representing the Premier:
I
refer to the costs incurred by WA taxpayers caused by the Premier's
defamatory statements relating to Clive Palmer.
(1) Did anyone coerce or compel the
Premier to make defamatory statements about Clive Palmer?
(2) Does the Premier regret
publicly calling Mr Palmer an enemy of the state?
(3) What benefits
have WA taxpayers gained from the approximately $2 million spent on legal
proceedings defending the statements by the Premier?
(4) Can the
Premier outline in detail how the defamation proceedings involving Clive Palmer
directly resulted in saving WA taxpayers $30 billion?

AnswerView source ↗

(1)–(4) The
Premier detailed matters regarding Clive Palmer's numerous legal
actions last year. As the Premier has said, he wishes Western Australia never
had to deal with the legal action brought on by Clive Palmer. However, it is
crucial that, as a state government, we stand up for our state. Clive Palmer
has a history of bringing costly legal actions against Western Australia, as
well as against people whose job it is to defend the interests of our state. As
well as attempting to sue Western Australians for approximately $30 billion,
Clive Palmer attempted to tear down our border at the height of the pandemic,
which would have caused deadly health outcomes and economic devastation for the
whole state.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more