❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice addresses a minister's possession and potential use of a cabinet decision from the previous government, specifically concerning the Perth urban rail system tender. The minister admits to using the document.
AnsweredQoN 671Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the minister’s use of a cabinet decision of the previous Government. (1) After the minister found that she had unwittingly come into possession of a cabinet decision of the previous Administration, did she do anything to seek to remedy this unintended breach of longstanding custom? (2) Why did she have a copy of the document with her at Parliament House on Tuesday? (3) What did she intend to do with it? (4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
(1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(1) After the minister found that she had unwittingly come into possession of a cabinet decision of the previous Administration, did she do anything to seek to remedy this unintended breach of longstanding custom? (2) Why did she have a copy of the document with her at Parliament House on Tuesday? (3) What did she intend to do with it? (4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(2) Why did she have a copy of the document with her at Parliament House on Tuesday? (3) What did she intend to do with it? (4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(3) What did she intend to do with it? (4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(4) Yes.
(1) After the minister found that she had unwittingly come into possession of a cabinet decision of the previous Administration, did she do anything to seek to remedy this unintended breach of longstanding custom? (2) Why did she have a copy of the document with her at Parliament House on Tuesday? (3) What did she intend to do with it? (4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(2) Why did she have a copy of the document with her at Parliament House on Tuesday? (3) What did she intend to do with it? (4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(3) What did she intend to do with it? (4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(4) Did she make any use of it in the House prior to being required to table it? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(1) I am advised that the minister retained possession of the document in her file that day, having recently considered it in the course of examining the reasons for the problems in the original tender for the new railcars for the Perth urban rail system and why there was a need for a new tender. (2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(2) The document was in a file of matters for the minister’s consideration that day. (3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(3) The minister had no particular intention to make further use of the document. (4) Yes.
(4) Yes.
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.