❓ Mr. Johnston questions the Minister for Energy regarding the accuracy of the reported cost of the Muja Power Station refurbishment, citing a KPMG report. The Minister defends the reported figure, explaining the methodology used by KPMG.
AnsweredQoN 273Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
MUJA POWER STATION — REFURBISHMENT —
KPMG REPORT
273. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON to the
Minister for Energy:
I refer to the Muja AB scandal.
(1) Can the
minister confirm that page 6 of the KPMG report that he tabled today details
the actual cost of the project as $327.9 million?
(2) Does the
minister understand that when he told Parliament today ''that the actual
cost of the refurbishment was $308.4 million'', it is not a true figure
as that figure is net of income, not the actual costs?
KPMG REPORT
273. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON to the
Minister for Energy:
I refer to the Muja AB scandal.
(1) Can the
minister confirm that page 6 of the KPMG report that he tabled today details
the actual cost of the project as $327.9 million?
(2) Does the
minister understand that when he told Parliament today ''that the actual
cost of the refurbishment was $308.4 million'', it is not a true figure
as that figure is net of income, not the actual costs?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2)
The methodology applied—it is very sophisticated for the member for
Cannington who has blinkers in front of his face rather than on the side—is
that KPMG has taken all the costs and subtracted revenue from it, including the
operations of plants 3 and 4 over the last year and the operations of plants 1
and 2 during part of February. Therefore, we estimated the cost net of
operating revenue as $308 million. That is how KPMG did the estimate. That is
what I put forward. The member might like to distort the figures as he wishes,
but that is the way KPMG estimated it and it is the correct methodology.
The methodology applied—it is very sophisticated for the member for
Cannington who has blinkers in front of his face rather than on the side—is
that KPMG has taken all the costs and subtracted revenue from it, including the
operations of plants 3 and 4 over the last year and the operations of plants 1
and 2 during part of February. Therefore, we estimated the cost net of
operating revenue as $308 million. That is how KPMG did the estimate. That is
what I put forward. The member might like to distort the figures as he wishes,
but that is the way KPMG estimated it and it is the correct methodology.
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.