❓ Hon B.K. Donaldson asks about the commencement, team, completion date, and focus on core services of the Agriculture Western Australia review. Hon Kim Chance confirms the review is underway, outlines the stakeholder-driven first stage, provides estimated timelines, and emphasizes the focus on core services due to financial constraints.
AnsweredQoN 38Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Will the minister advise the House whether a review of Agriculture Western Australia has commenced? (2) If so, who is on the review team? (3) When does the minister expect the review to be completed? (4) Will the review have a focus on ensuring that Agriculture WA’s core services are delivered as a priority? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(2) If so, who is on the review team? (3) When does the minister expect the review to be completed? (4) Will the review have a focus on ensuring that Agriculture WA’s core services are delivered as a priority? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(3) When does the minister expect the review to be completed? (4) Will the review have a focus on ensuring that Agriculture WA’s core services are delivered as a priority? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(4) Will the review have a focus on ensuring that Agriculture WA’s core services are delivered as a priority? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(2) If so, who is on the review team? (3) When does the minister expect the review to be completed? (4) Will the review have a focus on ensuring that Agriculture WA’s core services are delivered as a priority? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(3) When does the minister expect the review to be completed? (4) Will the review have a focus on ensuring that Agriculture WA’s core services are delivered as a priority? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(4) Will the review have a focus on ensuring that Agriculture WA’s core services are delivered as a priority? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(1) Yes, a review of Agriculture Western Australia’s service delivery is under way. I make a clear distinction between service delivery and departmental structure because, like all other government agencies, its structure is under review. (2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(2) The review requires no-one other than me to take it through the first stage. The first stage of the review involves asking Agriculture WA stakeholders - principally represented by the Western Australian Farmers Federation, the Pastoralists and Graziers Association and other parties - what are their aims and objectives for the department. They give the department a great deal of money to provide a service and we want to know whether they are getting the service they are paying for and whether we are delivering the priorities they want delivered. I expect that stage of the review to last another two to three months. We will then be in a position to formalise the review because there will be clear objectives. The listing of the objectives requires some discipline because the stakeholders will have to set priorities. I hope that we will establish a clear process through which we can outline the terms of reference for the more formal stage of the review. (3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(3) I expect that, once we have completed the first stage of the review, we will be able to finalise the process in about six months, but that is only an estimate. (4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
(4) This question of core services is very interesting. One of the review objectives is to focus the outcomes from Agriculture WA on its core services. The stakeholders - farmers and others involved in primary industry - have been asking for that for some time. Agriculture WA is delivering a wide range of services, some of which stand outside the Government’s view of the department’s role. The Government believes that role is to provide for the development and extension of scientific outcomes for the benefit of agriculture, but the industry may have a different view, and that is what we are trying to determine. An examination of the services provided by Agriculture WA within the definition I have provided indicates large areas of overlap. Given the financial stringency being imposed on all government departments by the Government, it is necessary to focus on core services and to determine whether issues of lower priority need to be eliminated or slimmed down. That may involve a number of issues. Without trying to identify them and send out the wrong messages, we want the stakeholders to say what they want kept and what is of lower priority.
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.