❓ Opposition questions the payout to the former head of the Government Media Office. Premier defends the payout, citing savings generated and a mutual agreement to end employment after restructuring.
AnsweredQoN 180Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PAUL PLOWMAN — PAYOUT
I refer to the $78 475 payout to Mr Paul Plowman, the former head of the Government Media Office, after approximately 15 months’ employment. (1) How does the Premier justify paying out a political appointee of just 15 months the sum of $78 475? (2) Why were the services of Mr Plowman dispensed with? (3) Did the Premier negotiate this arrangement and did he make the decision to tick off on this enormous amount of money for little more than one year’s service? Mr C.J. BARNETT
I refer to the $78 475 payout to Mr Paul Plowman, the former head of the Government Media Office, after approximately 15 months’ employment. (1) How does the Premier justify paying out a political appointee of just 15 months the sum of $78 475? (2) Why were the services of Mr Plowman dispensed with? (3) Did the Premier negotiate this arrangement and did he make the decision to tick off on this enormous amount of money for little more than one year’s service? Mr C.J. BARNETT
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
(1) How does the Premier justify paying out a political appointee of just 15 months the sum of $78 475? (2) Why were the services of Mr Plowman dispensed with? (3) Did the Premier negotiate this arrangement and did he make the decision to tick off on this enormous amount of money for little more than one year’s service? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
(2) Why were the services of Mr Plowman dispensed with? (3) Did the Premier negotiate this arrangement and did he make the decision to tick off on this enormous amount of money for little more than one year’s service? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
(3) Did the Premier negotiate this arrangement and did he make the decision to tick off on this enormous amount of money for little more than one year’s service? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
(1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
(1) How does the Premier justify paying out a political appointee of just 15 months the sum of $78 475? (2) Why were the services of Mr Plowman dispensed with? (3) Did the Premier negotiate this arrangement and did he make the decision to tick off on this enormous amount of money for little more than one year’s service? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
(2) Why were the services of Mr Plowman dispensed with? (3) Did the Premier negotiate this arrangement and did he make the decision to tick off on this enormous amount of money for little more than one year’s service? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
(3) Did the Premier negotiate this arrangement and did he make the decision to tick off on this enormous amount of money for little more than one year’s service? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
(1)–(3) The appointment of Paul Plowman was not a political appointment. He had experience as a press secretary and a press officer under governments of both persuasions. He also had extensive experience in running his own public relations and media advice business. He was appointed by the Liberal–National government to head the Government Media Office and to oversee government expenditure in advertising and the like. In that role, he probably saved the government in the order of $7 million by the better placement and purchasing of print and television advertising space. He also undertook the government’s commitment to cut back on government advertising. He oversaw and implemented that election commitment on behalf of the government. Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mr M. McGowan : Why did you get rid of him then? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member asked a question and I am answering it. The member is so impolite. One of Mr Plowman’s roles was to look at the whole operation of government media. To his credit, he recommended to me that the Government Media Office be disbanded. That was the entity that he headed and I accepted that recommendation. We made the decision that ministerial media officers would be assigned to work within ministerial offices and also be accountable to the chief of staff of those offices and, ultimately, the minister. We shifted the press officers out of the Government Media Office in physical form and shifted their employment and responsibilities to ministerial offices. That left poor Mr Plowman without the agency that he was running. He disbanded the agency and shifted out the staff. Following that, we had a discussion and it was mutually decided that he would move on. A period of his contract remained. He served out a couple of months of that and he was paid out the remaining part. I would have liked that association to have been longer but it did not work out in that sense. I compliment Paul on the millions of dollars that he saved in media expenditure. Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : Ha! Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : He saved about $7 million. Unlike the previous government, we do not waste taxpayers’ money in that way. It is far more accountable to have media staff working in ministerial offices and for them to be accountable to the minister and the chief of staff.
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.