A WA parliamentary question regarding a default notice served to Port Kennedy Resorts Pty Ltd (PKR) and the government's response, referring to a previous answer for further details.

AnsweredQoN 369Legislative Assembly
Asked
12 June 2001
Portfolio
Planning and Infrastructure

QuestionView source ↗

(b) has the Government extended the 90 day remedy period; (c) if so, what is the extension period of time, and upon what basis was it extended; (d) if not, has PKR complied with the default notice; (e) which of the nine points in the default notice have not been complied with; and (f) what action will the Government now take, or has taken, in respect to the default notice?
(c) if so, what is the extension period of time, and upon what basis was it extended; (d) if not, has PKR complied with the default notice; (e) which of the nine points in the default notice have not been complied with; and (f) what action will the Government now take, or has taken, in respect to the default notice?
(d) if not, has PKR complied with the default notice; (e) which of the nine points in the default notice have not been complied with; and (f) what action will the Government now take, or has taken, in respect to the default notice?
(e) which of the nine points in the default notice have not been complied with; and (f) what action will the Government now take, or has taken, in respect to the default notice?
(f) what action will the Government now take, or has taken, in respect to the default notice?
(i) 6 instances in which PKR failed to carry out and complete mandatory elements of the Project; (ii) 2 instances in which PKR charged its rights under the State Agreement without the prior consent of the Minister; and (iii) PKR's failure to demonstrate that it has the capacity to proceed with and complete the Project in accordance with the State Agreement. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (d) No. (e) Not applicable. (f) I refer the Hon Member for Kingsley to my response to her earlier question on this matter (PQ LA 301).
(b) No. (c) Not applicable. (d) No. (e) Not applicable. (f) I refer the Hon Member for Kingsley to my response to her earlier question on this matter (PQ LA 301).
(c) Not applicable. (d) No. (e) Not applicable. (f) I refer the Hon Member for Kingsley to my response to her earlier question on this matter (PQ LA 301).
(d) No. (e) Not applicable. (f) I refer the Hon Member for Kingsley to my response to her earlier question on this matter (PQ LA 301).
(e) Not applicable. (f) I refer the Hon Member for Kingsley to my response to her earlier question on this matter (PQ LA 301).
(f) I refer the Hon Member for Kingsley to my response to her earlier question on this matter (PQ LA 301).

AnswerView source ↗

Answered
1 August 2001
Responded by
Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
50 days
(a) The Notice of Default served on Port Kennedy Resorts Pty Ltd (PKR) by the State on 14 November 2000 identified nine separate instances of default, including:
(i) 6 instances in which PKR failed to carry out and complete mandatory elements of the Project;
(ii) 2 instances in which PKR charged its rights under the State Agreement without the prior consent of the Minister; and
(iii) PKR's failure to demonstrate that it has the capacity to proceed with and complete the Project in accordance with the State Agreement.
(b) No.
(c) Not applicable.
(d) No.
(e) Not applicable.
(f) I refer the Hon Member for Kingsley to my response to her earlier question on this matter (PQ LA 301).

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more