❓ Hon. Norman Moore asks about the difficulties facing E.G. Green and Sons. Hon. Kim Chance responds, detailing the timeline of his awareness and actions taken, including meetings and offers of assistance, focusing on non-financial support and a meeting with the company's bank.
AnsweredQoN 454Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) When did the minister first become aware of the difficulties facing the E.G. Green and Sons operations at Harvey? (2) What did he do at that time to assist the company with its difficulties? (3) Now that the company is clearly facing problems, what does he propose to do to alleviate the situation for the company, its employees, suppliers and customers? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
(2) What did he do at that time to assist the company with its difficulties? (3) Now that the company is clearly facing problems, what does he propose to do to alleviate the situation for the company, its employees, suppliers and customers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
(3) Now that the company is clearly facing problems, what does he propose to do to alleviate the situation for the company, its employees, suppliers and customers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
(1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
(2) What did he do at that time to assist the company with its difficulties? (3) Now that the company is clearly facing problems, what does he propose to do to alleviate the situation for the company, its employees, suppliers and customers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
(3) Now that the company is clearly facing problems, what does he propose to do to alleviate the situation for the company, its employees, suppliers and customers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
(1)-(3) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for some notice of this question. The answer to the first part of the question has multiple layers. The straight answer is about 12 months ago, but that was at the level of difficulty that meat processing establishments Australia-wide were having; it was very much a generic issue. I had a meeting with members of the board of E.G. Green and Sons about six or seven weeks ago, and it brought to my attention a range of more specific difficulties that the company was experiencing. We discussed a number of options available to the company at that stage. Those options, however, were more related to long-term solutions and the company’s decision, about which it had advised me at that meeting six or seven weeks ago, to restructure its operations to meet the company’s growing and specific issues. Telephone calls were made between my office and members of the board in the intervening period, but most particularly after the bank’s decision that was conveyed to the company on Thursday of last week. I met most recently with the board this afternoon here in Parliament House. At each of those meetings, and given that there were effectively three levels of discussion - generic, specific but long term, and then specific but short term, which are the latest meetings - we discussed a range of options about which the company has sought advice from the government. Most recently at this afternoon’s meeting, I asked the company to enumerate and quantify the nature of assistance that it believes government might be able to provide. The company has indicated the scope of those options. Some are financial and some are not. The most urgent priority fits into the latter category - that is, the most urgent priority does not involve financial assistance, but rather involves me seeking a meeting with the company’s bankers, the National Australia Bank. I have undertaken to seek that meeting this week, because the most urgent priority for the company is to relieve the immediate and short-term pressures that it is facing. I reiterate what I have said publicly on this matter: this company is very sound structurally, although it needs to make some strategic changes. The absence of those changes has led to its immediate problems, but it is a company that has posted negative trading results only two or three times in its 86-year history. It is responsible for more than half of Western Australia’s beef exports. The beef export industry itself is in a spectacularly strong position and has grown over the past four years from a net worth of approximately $60 million to a net worth of nearly $150 million. It is a very strong industry. E.G. Green and Sons is an important part of that industry. Indeed, it is the jewel of the beef export industry in Western Australia. I have confidence in its future to continue and I believe the industry has every reason to have confidence in its future.
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.