❓ Opposition MP Saffioti questions the Minister for Planning regarding the valuation of the East Perth Power Station site, following an Auditor General's report criticizing the withholding of valuation information. The Minister defends the decision, citing commercial sensitivity during an expression of interest process.
AnsweredQoN 555Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
EAST PERTH
POWER STATION SITE — VALUATION
555. Ms R. SAFFIOTI to the
Minister for Planning:
I refer to today's Auditor General's report
and his finding that the minister's decision not to provide the current
valuation of the East Perth power station site was not reasonable and therefore
not appropriate.
(1) What is the current valuation of
this site?
(2) How many unsolicited proposals
or inquiries were made for the site?
(3) How many expressions of interest
for lot 600 have been formally submitted?
POWER STATION SITE — VALUATION
555. Ms R. SAFFIOTI to the
Minister for Planning:
I refer to today's Auditor General's report
and his finding that the minister's decision not to provide the current
valuation of the East Perth power station site was not reasonable and therefore
not appropriate.
(1) What is the current valuation of
this site?
(2) How many unsolicited proposals
or inquiries were made for the site?
(3) How many expressions of interest
for lot 600 have been formally submitted?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3)
I am aware of the report by the Auditor General. That follows the process that
is required under legislation in which, in response to questions, a decision is
made not to provide what is regarded as commercially sensitive information. My
recollection of the Auditor General's comments is that it was regarded
as appropriate that commercial valuations that were obtained by the
Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority for the East Perth power station site were
not provided. That is really a matter of commonsense. Given that we are
undergoing a process of inviting expressions of interest from the private
sector, it would not be appropriate to make publicly available the confidential
commercial evaluations that have been undertaken by the private sector or by
professional valuers outside of government.
The Auditor General commented that
it would have been appropriate to provide information to Parliament; that was
in relation to an evaluation by Landgate. That information is essentially
publicly available. People just need to pay a modest fee, I understand, to
Landgate and then that information is made available. The MRA took the
question, as I did and as my office did, to mean that a request for the
confidential commercial valuations undertaken was being sought by Parliament.
That was our interpretation and therefore, for the reasons I have outlined,
that information was not provided.
In relation to the current
process, an expression of interest process is still underway through the MRA.
The closing date for the submission of those expressions of interest has
passed. They have been received. I am not sure whether the number has been made
public, so I probably should not say, but it is around five or six, if I
remember rightly. They are being assessed. A recommendation will be provided to
government and then a decision will be made about what is the next appropriate
step.
I am aware of the report by the Auditor General. That follows the process that
is required under legislation in which, in response to questions, a decision is
made not to provide what is regarded as commercially sensitive information. My
recollection of the Auditor General's comments is that it was regarded
as appropriate that commercial valuations that were obtained by the
Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority for the East Perth power station site were
not provided. That is really a matter of commonsense. Given that we are
undergoing a process of inviting expressions of interest from the private
sector, it would not be appropriate to make publicly available the confidential
commercial evaluations that have been undertaken by the private sector or by
professional valuers outside of government.
The Auditor General commented that
it would have been appropriate to provide information to Parliament; that was
in relation to an evaluation by Landgate. That information is essentially
publicly available. People just need to pay a modest fee, I understand, to
Landgate and then that information is made available. The MRA took the
question, as I did and as my office did, to mean that a request for the
confidential commercial valuations undertaken was being sought by Parliament.
That was our interpretation and therefore, for the reasons I have outlined,
that information was not provided.
In relation to the current
process, an expression of interest process is still underway through the MRA.
The closing date for the submission of those expressions of interest has
passed. They have been received. I am not sure whether the number has been made
public, so I probably should not say, but it is around five or six, if I
remember rightly. They are being assessed. A recommendation will be provided to
government and then a decision will be made about what is the next appropriate
step.
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.