❓ Hon. Fels questions the potential loss of funding for the Rural Financial Counselling Service WA. Hon. Chance responds that the Commonwealth may not be withdrawing funding and has selected a new provider, but the selection process is under scrutiny.
AnsweredQoN 587Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
RURAL FINANCIAL COUNSELLING SERVICE WA — FUNDING
I refer to the loss of yet another service to the rural community as a result of the commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s recent decision to cease funding for the Rural Financial Counselling Service WA from the end of June 2008. (1) Will the minister ask the Department of Agriculture and Food to assume responsibility for this valuable program? (2) Does the minister defend the commonwealth government’s continued withdrawal of support services from rural Western Australia? The PRESIDENT : I call the minister, insofar as the question relates to his ministerial responsibilities. Hon KIM CHANCE
I refer to the loss of yet another service to the rural community as a result of the commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s recent decision to cease funding for the Rural Financial Counselling Service WA from the end of June 2008. (1) Will the minister ask the Department of Agriculture and Food to assume responsibility for this valuable program? (2) Does the minister defend the commonwealth government’s continued withdrawal of support services from rural Western Australia? The PRESIDENT : I call the minister, insofar as the question relates to his ministerial responsibilities. Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
(1) Will the minister ask the Department of Agriculture and Food to assume responsibility for this valuable program? (2) Does the minister defend the commonwealth government’s continued withdrawal of support services from rural Western Australia? The PRESIDENT : I call the minister, insofar as the question relates to his ministerial responsibilities. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
(2) Does the minister defend the commonwealth government’s continued withdrawal of support services from rural Western Australia? The PRESIDENT : I call the minister, insofar as the question relates to his ministerial responsibilities. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
The PRESIDENT : I call the minister, insofar as the question relates to his ministerial responsibilities. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
(1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
(1) Will the minister ask the Department of Agriculture and Food to assume responsibility for this valuable program? (2) Does the minister defend the commonwealth government’s continued withdrawal of support services from rural Western Australia? The PRESIDENT : I call the minister, insofar as the question relates to his ministerial responsibilities. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
(2) Does the minister defend the commonwealth government’s continued withdrawal of support services from rural Western Australia? The PRESIDENT : I call the minister, insofar as the question relates to his ministerial responsibilities. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
The PRESIDENT : I call the minister, insofar as the question relates to his ministerial responsibilities. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
(1)-(2) I am not sure that the commonwealth government has made such a decision; indeed, the contrary seems to be the case. My understanding of the recent decision about the Rural Financial Counselling Service—funding for which the state government contributes 10 per cent and the commonwealth government 90 per cent, so I do indeed have a direct role in the question—is that the commonwealth government recently conducted a selection process for, and has now named, a new provider for the service. That does not seem to be consistent with the view that the commonwealth government will no longer provide the service. It has just been through the process of nominating a new provider. There is an issue about the selection process for the new provider in the Western Australian context, of which the honourable member is aware because he has previously asked me a question about it. Although the commonwealth government had named the service providers for each of the other states and territories, it had not thus far named a provider for the service in Western Australia because of the questions that had been asked about the selection process. My feeling is that it is probably not the case that the commonwealth government will withdraw the service. Indeed, given the fact that the commonwealth government has recently selected new providers in every other state, it would seem that its intention is to continue the service. I certainly hope that is the case, because if it is not the case, the state government will have to consider the very question asked by Hon Anthony Fels.
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.