❓ Question regarding cost overruns, project management deficiencies, and environmental considerations in the Ord River Irrigation Expansion project. The Minister's response largely rejects further reviews or changes, citing project completion, but commits to considering environmental impacts in future expansions.
AnsweredQoN 1199Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the recommendations from the 'Special Inquiry into
government programs and projects' for the Ord River irrigation Expansion
project, and I ask: (a) given the original $220 million budget, and the eventual $334
million spend, the Special Inquirer believes that the Ord River Irrigation
Expansion Project should have had its own separate steering committee. Will the Government create this separate steering committee without
conflicted members as recommended in this report; (b) if no to (a), why not; (c) the project allocated $200,000 for environmental costs, yet
by June 2016, the environmental costs had reached $8.1 million.
Will the Minister provide a detailed breakdown of what the extra $7.9 million for
'environmental management' was spent on and the correlating dates; (d) if no to (c), why not; (e) project
management of the Ord River Expansion project was denounced by the Auditor
General's report in September 2016, due to cross-membership between
committees, unclear terms of reference and the regularity of meetings. In
addition, Ministerial officers were members of the Steering Committee, as
were the managers for the irrigation and Commonwealth projects, which
blurred the responsibility and authority for each level.
Will the
Minister undertake a review of the project management framework for the project with the aim to fix the issues outlined in both the Auditor General's report and
by the Special Inquirer; (f) if no to (e), why not; (g) regarding the finance of the project, the Special Inquirer reported that the project should have been subject to
Department of Finance co-ordinated Gateway Reviews. These reviews would have
provided an independent assessment of the project governance and delivery at
key milestones. Will these reviews be required by the Minister to be conducted
hence forth as the project progresses key milestones; (h) if no to (g), why not; (i) regarding the
future expansion of thousands of hectares of irrigated agriculture projects across
the Kimberley and the Pilbara, will the cumulative impacts to climate change
and biodiversity loss from extended land clearing, and water extraction be taken
into consideration in the planning phase by the Minister for Regional
Development; and (j) if no to (i), why not?
government programs and projects' for the Ord River irrigation Expansion
project, and I ask: (a) given the original $220 million budget, and the eventual $334
million spend, the Special Inquirer believes that the Ord River Irrigation
Expansion Project should have had its own separate steering committee. Will the Government create this separate steering committee without
conflicted members as recommended in this report; (b) if no to (a), why not; (c) the project allocated $200,000 for environmental costs, yet
by June 2016, the environmental costs had reached $8.1 million.
Will the Minister provide a detailed breakdown of what the extra $7.9 million for
'environmental management' was spent on and the correlating dates; (d) if no to (c), why not; (e) project
management of the Ord River Expansion project was denounced by the Auditor
General's report in September 2016, due to cross-membership between
committees, unclear terms of reference and the regularity of meetings. In
addition, Ministerial officers were members of the Steering Committee, as
were the managers for the irrigation and Commonwealth projects, which
blurred the responsibility and authority for each level.
Will the
Minister undertake a review of the project management framework for the project with the aim to fix the issues outlined in both the Auditor General's report and
by the Special Inquirer; (f) if no to (e), why not; (g) regarding the finance of the project, the Special Inquirer reported that the project should have been subject to
Department of Finance co-ordinated Gateway Reviews. These reviews would have
provided an independent assessment of the project governance and delivery at
key milestones. Will these reviews be required by the Minister to be conducted
hence forth as the project progresses key milestones; (h) if no to (g), why not; (i) regarding the
future expansion of thousands of hectares of irrigated agriculture projects across
the Kimberley and the Pilbara, will the cumulative impacts to climate change
and biodiversity loss from extended land clearing, and water extraction be taken
into consideration in the planning phase by the Minister for Regional
Development; and (j) if no to (i), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
27 June 2018
Responded by
Minister for Regional Development
Response time
10 days
(a) No
(b) While an appropriate recommendation, a separate steering committee is no longer required. The aims and objectives of the Ord East Kimberley Expansion Project have been met resulting in $300 million of infrastructure assets being constructed and developers appointed to develop and farm over 18,000 hectares. While some residual tasks remain these are adequately managed and governed through the normal departmental processes within the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, in consultation with other government agencies as required.
(c) [Refer to tabled paper no. ]
(d) Not applicable
(e) No
(f) The Ord East Kimberley Expansion Project commenced in 2009 with key decisions made by the Ord Ministerial Council between 2009 and 2015. A residual budget of $10 million remains to fulfil outstanding obligations. These obligations are adequately managed and governed through the normal departmental processes within the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, in consultation with other government agencies as required.
(g) No
(h) All the key project milestones in the Ord East Kimberley Expansion Project have been met. There are no remaining project milestones that warrant a Department of Finance co-ordinated Gateway Review.
(i) Yes
(j) Not applicable
(b) While an appropriate recommendation, a separate steering committee is no longer required. The aims and objectives of the Ord East Kimberley Expansion Project have been met resulting in $300 million of infrastructure assets being constructed and developers appointed to develop and farm over 18,000 hectares. While some residual tasks remain these are adequately managed and governed through the normal departmental processes within the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, in consultation with other government agencies as required.
(c) [Refer to tabled paper no. ]
(d) Not applicable
(e) No
(f) The Ord East Kimberley Expansion Project commenced in 2009 with key decisions made by the Ord Ministerial Council between 2009 and 2015. A residual budget of $10 million remains to fulfil outstanding obligations. These obligations are adequately managed and governed through the normal departmental processes within the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, in consultation with other government agencies as required.
(g) No
(h) All the key project milestones in the Ord East Kimberley Expansion Project have been met. There are no remaining project milestones that warrant a Department of Finance co-ordinated Gateway Review.
(i) Yes
(j) Not applicable
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.