Hon Peter Collier questions the Premier's justification for differing responses regarding email access related to the Standing Committee on Procedure and Privileges, specifically concerning former members of Parliament and electorate officers' email accounts. The Premier stands by his original response, claiming the questions were not identical.

AnsweredQoN 1011Legislative Council
Asked
18 September 2019
Portfolio
Leader of the House representing the Premier

QuestionView source ↗

STANDING COMMITTEE ON
PROCEDURE AND PRIVILEGES — FIFTY-FIFTH REPORT —EMAIL ACCESS
1011. Hon PETER COLLIER to the Leader of the House
representing the Premier:
I refer to the Premier's
response to question without notice 990 on Tuesday, 17 September 2019.
(1) How does the
Premier justify his response to part (1) of this question, given that the
Standing Committee on Procedure and Privileges is dealing with former and not
current members of Parliament?
(2) How does the
Premier justify his response to part (1) of this question provided to the
Legislative Council, given that he provided a completely different response to
an identical question asked by the member for Carine in the Legislative
Assembly on Tuesday, 17 September 2019?

AnswerView source ↗

On behalf of the Leader of the House,
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of the question.
(1) The Premier stands by his
response to the original question.
(2) The question
was not identical. The member for Carine expanded on the multitude of questions
previously asked, through his inclusion of electorate officers' email
accounts within the scope of his question.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more