❓ WA Attorney General expresses concern over federal inaction on Aboriginal corporation fraud and defends state's role in addressing local issues, linking it to the Corporations Law debate and service delivery concerns.
AnsweredQoN 394Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Will the Attorney General give the House an assurance that he will not entertain any federal takeover of the State’s Corporations Law until the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission get serious and start to investigate the many frauds committed against Aboriginal corporations in Western Australia that have been referred to them by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, members of Parliament and other concerned people? Hon PETER FOSS
AnswerView source ↗
The member has raised a matter that is of considerable concern to Western Australia. The Commonwealth has, and has always had, responsibility for Aboriginal corporations but it never seems to carry out its responsibility. I notice its failing in other areas, such as competition law. One sometimes wonders whether Western Australia exists when matters that are clearly anti-competitive are not seen as being within the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s ambit. Western Australian legislation provides the opportunity for this State to take control of things that the Federal Government is not prepared to control. It was specifically introduced because the Federal Government, once it has constitutional power in an area, lacks interest in doing anything about it. The view of the Western Australian Parliament on Corporations Law is that it would prefer to have a cooperative scheme, such as has previously existed. It is not to be. Western Australia came under enormous pressure in 1991 and is coming under enormous pressure now. We have agreed to a limited reference. In the course of that, the Government is trying to ensure that, as promised, the services are retained. The service agreement of 1991 promised that there would be no reduction in services. The States, other than New South Wales, have complained about the gradual withdrawal of services from States and decentralisation in New South Wales. The point raised in the question is a very good argument for the existence of State Governments. State Governments appear to be the only mechanism through which a response can be obtained for outlying areas of Australia. One will never receive a response from Canberra or Sydney or whichever city has the headquarters responsible for dealing with such complaints.
Hon PETER FOSS replied: The member has raised a matter that is of considerable concern to Western Australia. The Commonwealth has, and has always had, responsibility for Aboriginal corporations but it never seems to carry out its responsibility. I notice its failing in other areas, such as competition law. One sometimes wonders whether Western Australia exists when matters that are clearly anti-competitive are not seen as being within the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s ambit. Western Australian legislation provides the opportunity for this State to take control of things that the Federal Government is not prepared to control. It was specifically introduced because the Federal Government, once it has constitutional power in an area, lacks interest in doing anything about it. The view of the Western Australian Parliament on Corporations Law is that it would prefer to have a cooperative scheme, such as has previously existed. It is not to be. Western Australia came under enormous pressure in 1991 and is coming under enormous pressure now. We have agreed to a limited reference. In the course of that, the Government is trying to ensure that, as promised, the services are retained. The service agreement of 1991 promised that there would be no reduction in services. The States, other than New South Wales, have complained about the gradual withdrawal of services from States and decentralisation in New South Wales. The point raised in the question is a very good argument for the existence of State Governments. State Governments appear to be the only mechanism through which a response can be obtained for outlying areas of Australia. One will never receive a response from Canberra or Sydney or whichever city has the headquarters responsible for dealing with such complaints.
The member has raised a matter that is of considerable concern to Western Australia. The Commonwealth has, and has always had, responsibility for Aboriginal corporations but it never seems to carry out its responsibility. I notice its failing in other areas, such as competition law. One sometimes wonders whether Western Australia exists when matters that are clearly anti-competitive are not seen as being within the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s ambit. Western Australian legislation provides the opportunity for this State to take control of things that the Federal Government is not prepared to control. It was specifically introduced because the Federal Government, once it has constitutional power in an area, lacks interest in doing anything about it. The view of the Western Australian Parliament on Corporations Law is that it would prefer to have a cooperative scheme, such as has previously existed. It is not to be. Western Australia came under enormous pressure in 1991 and is coming under enormous pressure now. We have agreed to a limited reference. In the course of that, the Government is trying to ensure that, as promised, the services are retained. The service agreement of 1991 promised that there would be no reduction in services. The States, other than New South Wales, have complained about the gradual withdrawal of services from States and decentralisation in New South Wales. The point raised in the question is a very good argument for the existence of State Governments. State Governments appear to be the only mechanism through which a response can be obtained for outlying areas of Australia. One will never receive a response from Canberra or Sydney or whichever city has the headquarters responsible for dealing with such complaints.
Hon PETER FOSS replied: The member has raised a matter that is of considerable concern to Western Australia. The Commonwealth has, and has always had, responsibility for Aboriginal corporations but it never seems to carry out its responsibility. I notice its failing in other areas, such as competition law. One sometimes wonders whether Western Australia exists when matters that are clearly anti-competitive are not seen as being within the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s ambit. Western Australian legislation provides the opportunity for this State to take control of things that the Federal Government is not prepared to control. It was specifically introduced because the Federal Government, once it has constitutional power in an area, lacks interest in doing anything about it. The view of the Western Australian Parliament on Corporations Law is that it would prefer to have a cooperative scheme, such as has previously existed. It is not to be. Western Australia came under enormous pressure in 1991 and is coming under enormous pressure now. We have agreed to a limited reference. In the course of that, the Government is trying to ensure that, as promised, the services are retained. The service agreement of 1991 promised that there would be no reduction in services. The States, other than New South Wales, have complained about the gradual withdrawal of services from States and decentralisation in New South Wales. The point raised in the question is a very good argument for the existence of State Governments. State Governments appear to be the only mechanism through which a response can be obtained for outlying areas of Australia. One will never receive a response from Canberra or Sydney or whichever city has the headquarters responsible for dealing with such complaints.
The member has raised a matter that is of considerable concern to Western Australia. The Commonwealth has, and has always had, responsibility for Aboriginal corporations but it never seems to carry out its responsibility. I notice its failing in other areas, such as competition law. One sometimes wonders whether Western Australia exists when matters that are clearly anti-competitive are not seen as being within the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s ambit. Western Australian legislation provides the opportunity for this State to take control of things that the Federal Government is not prepared to control. It was specifically introduced because the Federal Government, once it has constitutional power in an area, lacks interest in doing anything about it. The view of the Western Australian Parliament on Corporations Law is that it would prefer to have a cooperative scheme, such as has previously existed. It is not to be. Western Australia came under enormous pressure in 1991 and is coming under enormous pressure now. We have agreed to a limited reference. In the course of that, the Government is trying to ensure that, as promised, the services are retained. The service agreement of 1991 promised that there would be no reduction in services. The States, other than New South Wales, have complained about the gradual withdrawal of services from States and decentralisation in New South Wales. The point raised in the question is a very good argument for the existence of State Governments. State Governments appear to be the only mechanism through which a response can be obtained for outlying areas of Australia. One will never receive a response from Canberra or Sydney or whichever city has the headquarters responsible for dealing with such complaints.
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.