❓ The WA parliamentary question concerns the prevention of interstate/foreign ownership of WA timber resources and the government's guarantees regarding Sotico's commitment to a WA furniture consortium. The Minister's response indicates that these issues did not arise during the allocation process.
AnsweredQoN 512Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) What specific steps have been or are being taken to prevent interstate or foreign-owned companies from taking ownership of allocations of Western Australia’s timber resources for the next 10 or 20 years? (2) Did the State Government gain a definite guarantee from Sotico in December 2002 during the timber allocations process regarding the company’s commitment to developing a new ownership structure with the WA furniture consortium? (3) What is being done to ensure that those assurances are being honoured? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
(1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(2) Did the State Government gain a definite guarantee from Sotico in December 2002 during the timber allocations process regarding the company’s commitment to developing a new ownership structure with the WA furniture consortium? (3) What is being done to ensure that those assurances are being honoured? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(3) What is being done to ensure that those assurances are being honoured? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(2) Did the State Government gain a definite guarantee from Sotico in December 2002 during the timber allocations process regarding the company’s commitment to developing a new ownership structure with the WA furniture consortium? (3) What is being done to ensure that those assurances are being honoured? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(3) What is being done to ensure that those assurances are being honoured? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(1) The possibility of interstate and foreign corporations gaining allocations in the request for proposals round did not arise because there were no applicants for proponents’ proposals from foreign or interstate bodies. I do not know how much more I can add to that answer. Hypothetically, I am not sure whether it would have been appropriate to determine, within the hierarchy of the judgments that were made within the RFP process, a weighting in favour of a Western Australian owner against an interstate or a foreign owner. However, that question did not arise because as far as I am aware none of the applicants was either interstate or foreign owned. (2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(2) No. The undertakings we sought from RFP proponents related to the proponent showing within the context of the RFP process that it either had the capacity to provide its own value-adding processes or to demonstrate linkages to a named value-adding partner in that process. Many of the smaller companies sought to do that. Again, it would probably have been improper to suggest that one firm should form an alliance with another firm - to wit, in this instance the WA furniture consortium. (3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
(3) I will answer the member’s third question more generally. Technically I should say that it is not applicable. I take the question more broadly than its literal meaning. The manner by which the Government will ensure that value-adding commitments generally are honoured - this is probably the way the member intended to ask the question - is that the contracts to be issued pursuant to the RFP process will always remain dependent upon the performance of all the parts of the contract. One of the key parts of that contract is the delivery of the value-added outcomes. In the event that a person or a company that has an allocation failed to deliver on all the specifications of the contract, that contract would be in danger of becoming null and void.
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.