❓ A parliamentary question regarding redundancy payments made to senior officers of the Western Power Corporation, specifically focusing on the payment to the former managing director and the Minister's role in approving it. The Minister defends the decision based on board recommendations and commercial practice.
AnsweredQoN 566Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
WESTERN POWER CORPORATION - REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS
I refer to the redundancy payments made to a number of senior officers of the former Western Power Corporation earlier this year and to the Auditor General’s report tabled today. (1) Why did the minister approve the payment of $1.02 million, including a $38 000 performance bonus, to the former managing director, Tony Iannello, effectively for nine months’ work? (2) As the minister and his predecessor, now the Premier, were advised by the board of its intention to make other payments - advice noted by the minister on 20 February this year - why did the minister not express any concerns to the board at that time? (3) Will the minister now admit that he has failed in his duty to the public by approving the payment to Mr Iannello, therefore setting the scene for the other payments, and by failing to act in February when he was able to? Mr F.M. LOGAN
I refer to the redundancy payments made to a number of senior officers of the former Western Power Corporation earlier this year and to the Auditor General’s report tabled today. (1) Why did the minister approve the payment of $1.02 million, including a $38 000 performance bonus, to the former managing director, Tony Iannello, effectively for nine months’ work? (2) As the minister and his predecessor, now the Premier, were advised by the board of its intention to make other payments - advice noted by the minister on 20 February this year - why did the minister not express any concerns to the board at that time? (3) Will the minister now admit that he has failed in his duty to the public by approving the payment to Mr Iannello, therefore setting the scene for the other payments, and by failing to act in February when he was able to? Mr F.M. LOGAN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(1) Why did the minister approve the payment of $1.02 million, including a $38 000 performance bonus, to the former managing director, Tony Iannello, effectively for nine months’ work? (2) As the minister and his predecessor, now the Premier, were advised by the board of its intention to make other payments - advice noted by the minister on 20 February this year - why did the minister not express any concerns to the board at that time? (3) Will the minister now admit that he has failed in his duty to the public by approving the payment to Mr Iannello, therefore setting the scene for the other payments, and by failing to act in February when he was able to? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(2) As the minister and his predecessor, now the Premier, were advised by the board of its intention to make other payments - advice noted by the minister on 20 February this year - why did the minister not express any concerns to the board at that time? (3) Will the minister now admit that he has failed in his duty to the public by approving the payment to Mr Iannello, therefore setting the scene for the other payments, and by failing to act in February when he was able to? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(3) Will the minister now admit that he has failed in his duty to the public by approving the payment to Mr Iannello, therefore setting the scene for the other payments, and by failing to act in February when he was able to? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(3) No.
(1) Why did the minister approve the payment of $1.02 million, including a $38 000 performance bonus, to the former managing director, Tony Iannello, effectively for nine months’ work? (2) As the minister and his predecessor, now the Premier, were advised by the board of its intention to make other payments - advice noted by the minister on 20 February this year - why did the minister not express any concerns to the board at that time? (3) Will the minister now admit that he has failed in his duty to the public by approving the payment to Mr Iannello, therefore setting the scene for the other payments, and by failing to act in February when he was able to? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(2) As the minister and his predecessor, now the Premier, were advised by the board of its intention to make other payments - advice noted by the minister on 20 February this year - why did the minister not express any concerns to the board at that time? (3) Will the minister now admit that he has failed in his duty to the public by approving the payment to Mr Iannello, therefore setting the scene for the other payments, and by failing to act in February when he was able to? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(3) Will the minister now admit that he has failed in his duty to the public by approving the payment to Mr Iannello, therefore setting the scene for the other payments, and by failing to act in February when he was able to? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
I thank the member for Darling Range for his question. It is good to see that he has read the report. (1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(1) I believe I have already spoken on this issue at length in this place previously. I indicated that I concurred with the recommendation of the board and the chairman of Western Power Corporation, as it was then, to pay out the rest of Mr Iannello’s contract, with certain conditions attached, which I have referred to in this house. We did that on the basis of good commercial practice. Mr Iannello was attracted by a former Minister for Energy to work for Western Power Corporation. He came from very highly paid employment to undertake a very difficult task at a lesser rate of pay. He did so with an outstanding record. He was not aware that the disaggregation would be concluded as quickly as it was. Therefore, it was recommended by the board to me that the rest of his contract be paid out, with certain conditions attached, and I concurred with that and did just that. (2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(2) By whom were the concerns raised? I raised concerns about a letter that was sent to me, as the new Minister for Energy - concerns had originally been raised with the previous Minister for Energy - regarding who was to be made redundant and when. Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr J.H.D. Day : You noted it on 20 February, and what else did you do then? Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr F.M. LOGAN : Absolutely; I noted it. After consultation with numerous people, about three weeks later - it was not even three weeks; it was less than three weeks - I wrote back asking why those people had been made redundant. This is the point that the member for Darling Range needs to pick up, and go back to - Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
Mr F.M. LOGAN : The member should just listen. He should go back to what the report says. The decision had already been made by the board. I questioned that decision. I questioned why those people were made redundant and I questioned how much money they had received. The findings of the Auditor General concur with my concerns. (3) No.
(3) No.
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.