❓ A WA parliamentary question seeks details on state ship visits to Wyndham, Broome, and Darwin, including contract specifics and penalties for non-compliance. The Minister acknowledges the issues and outlines remedial actions.
AnsweredQoN 402Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
STATE SHIP — WYNDHAM, BROOME AND DARWIN VISITS
(1) On what dates has a state ship visited the ports of Wyndham or Broome since 1 January 2011? (2) Does the contract with the state ship supplier require it to provide a regular scheduled service to these ports; and, if yes, what is the frequency that it is required to meet? (3) Does the contract require the state ship to visit Darwin; and, if yes, how often? (4) Has the state ship met its required frequency of visits to these ports in 2011; and, if no, why not? (5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
(1) On what dates has a state ship visited the ports of Wyndham or Broome since 1 January 2011? (2) Does the contract with the state ship supplier require it to provide a regular scheduled service to these ports; and, if yes, what is the frequency that it is required to meet? (3) Does the contract require the state ship to visit Darwin; and, if yes, how often? (4) Has the state ship met its required frequency of visits to these ports in 2011; and, if no, why not? (5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(2) Does the contract with the state ship supplier require it to provide a regular scheduled service to these ports; and, if yes, what is the frequency that it is required to meet? (3) Does the contract require the state ship to visit Darwin; and, if yes, how often? (4) Has the state ship met its required frequency of visits to these ports in 2011; and, if no, why not? (5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(3) Does the contract require the state ship to visit Darwin; and, if yes, how often? (4) Has the state ship met its required frequency of visits to these ports in 2011; and, if no, why not? (5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(4) Has the state ship met its required frequency of visits to these ports in 2011; and, if no, why not? (5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(2) Does the contract with the state ship supplier require it to provide a regular scheduled service to these ports; and, if yes, what is the frequency that it is required to meet? (3) Does the contract require the state ship to visit Darwin; and, if yes, how often? (4) Has the state ship met its required frequency of visits to these ports in 2011; and, if no, why not? (5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(3) Does the contract require the state ship to visit Darwin; and, if yes, how often? (4) Has the state ship met its required frequency of visits to these ports in 2011; and, if no, why not? (5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(4) Has the state ship met its required frequency of visits to these ports in 2011; and, if no, why not? (5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(5) Does the contract with the state ship supplier include any penalties for failing to meet a required frequency of visits; and, if yes, what is the penalty, and have any penalties been applied? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(1) On 22 January, 5–6 March, 13 April and 18 May 2011; and on 29 January, 8 March, 8 April and 13 May 2011. I think the first dates are in respect of the first port, and the second dates are in respect of the second port. I think that is the way that answer is constructed. (2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(2) Yes, with a 17-day frequency or better. (3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(3) No. (4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(4) The service has not met all its contractual obligations in respect of frequency of port calls due to a number of operational problems with the vessel itself and its subcontracted management. New arrangements are being put in place involving a new vessel and direct management by the service provider. (5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
(5) The contract defines a number of penalties for delays to the service. When the service provider has not met the required schedule of port calls, payment has been withheld for the relevant period.
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.