❓ Hon Norman Moore asks about Water Corporation employee spending on corporate entertaining. Hon Nick Griffiths responds, detailing an internal audit, corrective action, a financial penalty, and policy review, tabling related correspondence and offering further information.
AnsweredQoN 16Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to a newspaper article relating to the spending of $6 600 on corporate entertaining by an employee of the Water Corporation. (1) What action has the corporation or the minister taken to ascertain the propriety of the expenditure, and has any action been taken against the employee? (2) Have there been any other occasions on which Water Corporation employees have expended public funds on similar corporate entertaining and, if so, will the minister provide details? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
(1) What action has the corporation or the minister taken to ascertain the propriety of the expenditure, and has any action been taken against the employee? (2) Have there been any other occasions on which Water Corporation employees have expended public funds on similar corporate entertaining and, if so, will the minister provide details? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
(2) Have there been any other occasions on which Water Corporation employees have expended public funds on similar corporate entertaining and, if so, will the minister provide details? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
(1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment?
With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment?
Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place.
The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way.
(1) What action has the corporation or the minister taken to ascertain the propriety of the expenditure, and has any action been taken against the employee? (2) Have there been any other occasions on which Water Corporation employees have expended public funds on similar corporate entertaining and, if so, will the minister provide details? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
(2) Have there been any other occasions on which Water Corporation employees have expended public funds on similar corporate entertaining and, if so, will the minister provide details? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
(1) I am advised that the Managing Director of the Water Corporation ordered an internal audit on the issue. Subsequently, corrective action was taken to ensure full compliance in the future with the corporation’s policy on entertainment. A financial penalty was imposed on the employee. The newspaper article was in the Sunday Times on 15 February. On Monday 16 February I wrote to the managing director of the Water Corporation and received a response on 19 February. The 15 February is a Sunday and on Monday 16 February I attended to the matter when I had someone available to take down my words and carry out what I sought to do. The letter, addressed to Dr Gill, was short and states - Would you kindly let me know of Water Corporation’s policy in connection with corporate entertainment? Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment? My office received a response on 19 February from the corporation dated 18 February. When I have concluded with my answer I propose to table my letter to the Water Corporation and the response from Dr Gill. His letter is three pages long so I will not read it all. He responded to my letter dated 16 February and makes the following observation - This policy has been in place since 1997. It is similar to the Premier’s Circular 16/01 dated 11 September 2001. Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place. That is the remedial action referred to by the managing director. I table my letter to the managing director dated 16 February and the response dated 18 February, which sets out in some detail what is involved. The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way. [See paper No 1935.]
Please let me know how long the policy has been in place and what procedures are in place to ensure that the policy is not breached at anytime? With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment?
With respect to current arrangements, what events have attracted sponsorship, who has attended, at what cost and the reasons for such entertainment?
Authorised entertainment expenses can only be incurred through the Managing Director’s or a General Manager’s approval. Regular routine checks are carried out on entertainment expenses through the Corporation’s payment systems. In addition, the Corporation’s internal auditors carry out regular reviews. These did not indicate any breaches of the policy. Audits of approvals were not undertaken but have now been put in place.
The letter sets out particulars of events that have attracted sponsorship during this financial year. If the honourable member wishes to receive past information, I will be very pleased to accommodate him. He can either write to me or put a question on notice. I have nothing to hide in this regard and have taken prompt action to ensure that the corporation behaves in an accountable way.
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.