❓ Opposition questions government spending on energy projects and calls for the responsible minister's removal. The government defends its position, referencing a previous debate on the same topic.
AnsweredQoN 235Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
ENERGY — PROJECT EXPENDITURE
235. Hon SUE ELLERY to the Leader of the House representing
the Premier:
I refer to the government funding
spent for little result on various energy projects, including a $417 million
blowout on the solar feed-in tariff; a $100 million blowout on the Pilbara
underground power project; a $55 million blowout in Synergy's billing
system; delays and blowouts on the Kwinana gas turbine project costing $75 million;
and an estimated $250 million spend on what was supposed to be a privately
funded refurbishment of the Muja A and B facility.
Given the former energy minister's
role in wasting so much taxpayers' money, will the Premier now remove
him from the cabinet; and, if not why not?
The
PRESIDENT : The Leader of the House, representing the Premier.
235. Hon SUE ELLERY to the Leader of the House representing
the Premier:
I refer to the government funding
spent for little result on various energy projects, including a $417 million
blowout on the solar feed-in tariff; a $100 million blowout on the Pilbara
underground power project; a $55 million blowout in Synergy's billing
system; delays and blowouts on the Kwinana gas turbine project costing $75 million;
and an estimated $250 million spend on what was supposed to be a privately
funded refurbishment of the Muja A and B facility.
Given the former energy minister's
role in wasting so much taxpayers' money, will the Premier now remove
him from the cabinet; and, if not why not?
The
PRESIDENT : The Leader of the House, representing the Premier.
AnswerView source ↗
I am, thank you, and I think he has
given a very good response!
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this
question.
No; this topic was the subject of a matter of public
importance in the other place just yesterday, with the opposition moving a
motion that called on the Premier to ''sack Minister Collier from
cabinet''. The Premier responded extensively to this matter and I refer
the honourable member to those statements.
Point of Order
Hon
KEN TRAVERS : There been a
longstanding precedent in the house that we do not refer to debates in the
other place. To provide an answer referring us to a debate in the other place
breaches that longstanding convention.
Several members
interjected.
The PRESIDENT : Order. As members know, there is a
standing order saying something about alluding to debates in the other place. I
do not think debate in the other place was alluded to in this answer in terms
of a view. It was backing up an argument, but at least a substantial point of
view had been put in the answer, and for further information members can see
the transcript of the debate in the other house. I read the answer that way,
rather than it alluding to the debate in a way as to say that it was totally
ludicrous and wrong, or something like that.
given a very good response!
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this
question.
No; this topic was the subject of a matter of public
importance in the other place just yesterday, with the opposition moving a
motion that called on the Premier to ''sack Minister Collier from
cabinet''. The Premier responded extensively to this matter and I refer
the honourable member to those statements.
Point of Order
Hon
KEN TRAVERS : There been a
longstanding precedent in the house that we do not refer to debates in the
other place. To provide an answer referring us to a debate in the other place
breaches that longstanding convention.
Several members
interjected.
The PRESIDENT : Order. As members know, there is a
standing order saying something about alluding to debates in the other place. I
do not think debate in the other place was alluded to in this answer in terms
of a view. It was backing up an argument, but at least a substantial point of
view had been put in the answer, and for further information members can see
the transcript of the debate in the other house. I read the answer that way,
rather than it alluding to the debate in a way as to say that it was totally
ludicrous and wrong, or something like that.
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.