❓ A parliamentary question regarding water license fees introduced in July 2007, questioning their necessity and requesting a refund until proper assessment. The Minister defends the fees as crucial for water security and investment protection.
AnsweredQoN 40Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
WATER LICENCE FEES — ECONOMICS AND INDUSTRY STANDING COMMITTEE REPORT
I refer to the recently released Economics and Industry Standing Committee inquiry report into water licensing and services, which highlights that the introduction of water licence fees in July 2007 was a “self-imposed Department of Water deadline” and not an obligation under the National Water Initiative. (1) Will the minister direct the Department of Water to refund the water licence fees that were charged in July last year, at least until the Economic Regulation Authority can properly assess the fee structure? (2) Why did the minister support fees being charged last July when it is clear from the committee’s report that there was no immediate imperative to do so? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that his insistence on charging the fees is nothing more than premature and unnecessary revenue raising? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
I refer to the recently released Economics and Industry Standing Committee inquiry report into water licensing and services, which highlights that the introduction of water licence fees in July 2007 was a “self-imposed Department of Water deadline” and not an obligation under the National Water Initiative. (1) Will the minister direct the Department of Water to refund the water licence fees that were charged in July last year, at least until the Economic Regulation Authority can properly assess the fee structure? (2) Why did the minister support fees being charged last July when it is clear from the committee’s report that there was no immediate imperative to do so? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that his insistence on charging the fees is nothing more than premature and unnecessary revenue raising? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
(1) Will the minister direct the Department of Water to refund the water licence fees that were charged in July last year, at least until the Economic Regulation Authority can properly assess the fee structure? (2) Why did the minister support fees being charged last July when it is clear from the committee’s report that there was no immediate imperative to do so? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that his insistence on charging the fees is nothing more than premature and unnecessary revenue raising? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
(2) Why did the minister support fees being charged last July when it is clear from the committee’s report that there was no immediate imperative to do so? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that his insistence on charging the fees is nothing more than premature and unnecessary revenue raising? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
(3) Does the minister acknowledge that his insistence on charging the fees is nothing more than premature and unnecessary revenue raising? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
(1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
(1) Will the minister direct the Department of Water to refund the water licence fees that were charged in July last year, at least until the Economic Regulation Authority can properly assess the fee structure? (2) Why did the minister support fees being charged last July when it is clear from the committee’s report that there was no immediate imperative to do so? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that his insistence on charging the fees is nothing more than premature and unnecessary revenue raising? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
(2) Why did the minister support fees being charged last July when it is clear from the committee’s report that there was no immediate imperative to do so? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that his insistence on charging the fees is nothing more than premature and unnecessary revenue raising? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
(3) Does the minister acknowledge that his insistence on charging the fees is nothing more than premature and unnecessary revenue raising? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
(1)-(3) It is really disappointing that a member of the National Party does not understand the importance of water to agriculture, because that is clearly what is implied in the question. The member should read the report again, because he has said that it has a finding that it does not have. That may be in some of the content of the report, but that is not a finding, which I think is what the member said in his question. Businesses and people in the agriculture and irrigation sectors spend huge amounts of their own money investing in infrastructure to ensure that they can provide water to their enterprises. The member and other members opposite do not seem to realise that we have a severe problem with a drying climate. Therefore, we need to make sure that we give the maximum security possible to protect the investments that those people have made in their businesses, and we need to do that by ensuring that we have a far more rigorous licensing regime. A rigorous licensing regime involves people paying an annual fee; otherwise, the whole idea of a proper and thorough licensing system simply will not work. The whole point of having an annual licence management fee, which is at quite a low level and is much lower than that which applies in other states, is to try to ensure that we guarantee that the licensing and regulatory regime gives the greatest certainty possible to those businesses that rely on water and that, in many cases, are making huge investments in infrastructure to provide that water. The government is about guaranteeing that. The imputation in the member’s question is that he does not care about providing security to people who rely on that water.
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.