A WA parliamentary question on notice reveals the Water Corporation's consideration of funding a whitewater park, including initial support for feasibility studies and a later removal of a larger provision due to commercial concerns.

AnsweredQoN 753Legislative Council
Asked
24 September 2004
Portfolio
Government Enterprises

QuestionView source ↗

(1) Did the Water Corporation ever make a provision in its budget, forward estimates, business plan, statement of corporate intent or strategic development plan for - (a) part funding; or (b) full funding; or (c) other forms of financial assistance to support the development of a whitewater park with artificial rapids? (2) If so - (a) what was the commencement date; and (b) when was it programmed? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. (c) Yes. (2) (a) In 2000, $20 000; in 2001, $830 000; in 2002, $8 million; and in 2003, $2 million. These figures were put in the program in 2000. The commitment was for the corporation to support the feasibility studies and the commercial development of the proposal and was reflective of the $850 000 provided in 2000-01. The $10 million was not a commitment of expenditure but a provision to be considered if there was a sound commercial opportunity for the corporation to participate in an artificial park. This money has been removed from the corporation’s program. (b) It was programmed on 4 April 2000.
(b) full funding; or (c) other forms of financial assistance to support the development of a whitewater park with artificial rapids?
(c) other forms of financial assistance to support the development of a whitewater park with artificial rapids?
(b) when was it programmed?
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. (c) Yes. (2) (a) In 2000, $20 000; in 2001, $830 000; in 2002, $8 million; and in 2003, $2 million. These figures were put in the program in 2000. The commitment was for the corporation to support the feasibility studies and the commercial development of the proposal and was reflective of the $850 000 provided in 2000-01. The $10 million was not a commitment of expenditure but a provision to be considered if there was a sound commercial opportunity for the corporation to participate in an artificial park. This money has been removed from the corporation’s program. (b) It was programmed on 4 April 2000.
(1) (a) Yes. (b) No. (c) Yes. (2) (a) In 2000, $20 000; in 2001, $830 000; in 2002, $8 million; and in 2003, $2 million. These figures were put in the program in 2000. The commitment was for the corporation to support the feasibility studies and the commercial development of the proposal and was reflective of the $850 000 provided in 2000-01. The $10 million was not a commitment of expenditure but a provision to be considered if there was a sound commercial opportunity for the corporation to participate in an artificial park. This money has been removed from the corporation’s program. (b) It was programmed on 4 April 2000.
(b) No. (c) Yes. (2) (a) In 2000, $20 000; in 2001, $830 000; in 2002, $8 million; and in 2003, $2 million. These figures were put in the program in 2000. The commitment was for the corporation to support the feasibility studies and the commercial development of the proposal and was reflective of the $850 000 provided in 2000-01. The $10 million was not a commitment of expenditure but a provision to be considered if there was a sound commercial opportunity for the corporation to participate in an artificial park. This money has been removed from the corporation’s program. (b) It was programmed on 4 April 2000.
(c) Yes. (2) (a) In 2000, $20 000; in 2001, $830 000; in 2002, $8 million; and in 2003, $2 million. These figures were put in the program in 2000. The commitment was for the corporation to support the feasibility studies and the commercial development of the proposal and was reflective of the $850 000 provided in 2000-01. The $10 million was not a commitment of expenditure but a provision to be considered if there was a sound commercial opportunity for the corporation to participate in an artificial park. This money has been removed from the corporation’s program. (b) It was programmed on 4 April 2000.
(2) (a) In 2000, $20 000; in 2001, $830 000; in 2002, $8 million; and in 2003, $2 million. These figures were put in the program in 2000. The commitment was for the corporation to support the feasibility studies and the commercial development of the proposal and was reflective of the $850 000 provided in 2000-01. The $10 million was not a commitment of expenditure but a provision to be considered if there was a sound commercial opportunity for the corporation to participate in an artificial park. This money has been removed from the corporation’s program. (b) It was programmed on 4 April 2000.
(b) It was programmed on 4 April 2000.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more