❓ Question regarding extension of infill sewerage program to other areas and connection of government-owned homes. Answer focuses on justification for Spearwood decision and budgetary process for other projects.
AnsweredQoN 925Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
INFILL SEWERAGE PROGRAM — EXTENSION
I thank the minister and applaud his decision to reinstate the infill sewerage program in the Cockburn suburbs of Spearwood and Coogee. I also thank the Premier and Minister for Health, and any others involved in the decision-making process. But my question is — (1) Will the minister now act to resolve the disgraceful conditions for those residents still on septic tank sewerage in Kwinana; Rockingham; Quinns Rock; Alfred Cove; Dawesville; Bunbury; towns in the Shire of Murray; Mt Barker; and Denmark, just to name a few? (2) Will the minister work with the Treasurer to address the situation of government-owned Homeswest homes still not being connected to sewerage mains pipes, despite those mains having been laid past those houses as part of infill sewerage programs many, many years ago? Dr G.G. JACOBS
I thank the minister and applaud his decision to reinstate the infill sewerage program in the Cockburn suburbs of Spearwood and Coogee. I also thank the Premier and Minister for Health, and any others involved in the decision-making process. But my question is — (1) Will the minister now act to resolve the disgraceful conditions for those residents still on septic tank sewerage in Kwinana; Rockingham; Quinns Rock; Alfred Cove; Dawesville; Bunbury; towns in the Shire of Murray; Mt Barker; and Denmark, just to name a few? (2) Will the minister work with the Treasurer to address the situation of government-owned Homeswest homes still not being connected to sewerage mains pipes, despite those mains having been laid past those houses as part of infill sewerage programs many, many years ago? Dr G.G. JACOBS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
(1) Will the minister now act to resolve the disgraceful conditions for those residents still on septic tank sewerage in Kwinana; Rockingham; Quinns Rock; Alfred Cove; Dawesville; Bunbury; towns in the Shire of Murray; Mt Barker; and Denmark, just to name a few? (2) Will the minister work with the Treasurer to address the situation of government-owned Homeswest homes still not being connected to sewerage mains pipes, despite those mains having been laid past those houses as part of infill sewerage programs many, many years ago? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
(2) Will the minister work with the Treasurer to address the situation of government-owned Homeswest homes still not being connected to sewerage mains pipes, despite those mains having been laid past those houses as part of infill sewerage programs many, many years ago? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
(1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
(1) Will the minister now act to resolve the disgraceful conditions for those residents still on septic tank sewerage in Kwinana; Rockingham; Quinns Rock; Alfred Cove; Dawesville; Bunbury; towns in the Shire of Murray; Mt Barker; and Denmark, just to name a few? (2) Will the minister work with the Treasurer to address the situation of government-owned Homeswest homes still not being connected to sewerage mains pipes, despite those mains having been laid past those houses as part of infill sewerage programs many, many years ago? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
(2) Will the minister work with the Treasurer to address the situation of government-owned Homeswest homes still not being connected to sewerage mains pipes, despite those mains having been laid past those houses as part of infill sewerage programs many, many years ago? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
I thank the member for Cockburn for his question, and I thank him for his comments on the Spearwood sewerage situation. (1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
(1)-(2) It is very important that we make decisions for the right reasons, and I believe that the Spearwood-Cockburn decision was made for the right reasons. Central to those reasons were the public health and environmental health issues, particularly the public health issues. Back in 2006 there was a confidential report that prioritised the Cockburn and Spearwood situation of the breakdown of people’s septic tanks and leach drains. I received a letter from the Minister for Health a few weeks ago that highlighted a worsening health situation. As Mr Speaker and the member for Cockburn know, I went to Spearwood and met with many of the residents there, and I also met with the Spearwood action group. It was a little disappointing, however, that after I organised a parliamentary briefing with my agencies for parliamentarians about the issues of Spearwood, the member for Cockburn sort of clandestinely wafted in a person called John, who came along as the member for Cockburn’s research officer. John was not, in fact, the member’s research officer. It was, in a way, quite disappointing when he indicated that in fact he was just the research officer for the day, and that he was actually a resident and an activist for the Spearwood action group. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
Dr G.G. JACOBS : I just highlight that, because I tried to play this fairly and it was a little disappointing that the member for Cockburn, in a clandestine and a cloak-and-dagger way, after I had arranged a briefing, got Mr Cunai in to act as one of his research officers just for the day. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
The SPEAKER : Members! Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
Dr G.G. JACOBS : In response to the other part of the question, other projects that the member for Cockburn alluded to will be part of the budgetary process and will be considered on their merits during the budgetary process. They will be assessed on their merits, particularly on the public health aspects, as they were those in Spearwood, and I look forward to working through that process.
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.