❓ Hon Aaron Stonehouse questions the Premier regarding the Minister for Local Government's actions against the Town of Cambridge, deemed unreasonable by the Supreme Court. The Premier expresses full confidence in the Minister.
AnsweredQoN 1068Legislative Council
Asked
13 October 2020
Member
Portfolio
Leader of the House representing the Premier
QuestionView source ↗
MINISTER FOR LOCAL
GOVERNMENT — TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE
1068. Hon AARON STONEHOUSE to the Leader of the House
representing the Premier:
I refer the Premier to the judgement
handed down in the Supreme Court on 2 October 2020 granting relief to the Town
of Cambridge upon the grounds that the proposed actions by the Minister for
Local Government—namely, his threat to suspend the council—had
no basis in jurisdictional fact and were unreasonable and disproportionate.
(1) What
discussions, if any, have taken place between the Minister for Local Government
and the Premier regarding the proposed suspension of the Town of Cambridge
council?
(2) What was the
cost to the taxpayer of pursuing what appears to have been little more than the
minister's personal vendetta against a council whose philosophy he
disagrees with?
(3) What
additional costs are likely to accrue to the taxpayer in the coming months as a
result of this case?
(4) Does the
minister retain the Premier's confidence or will he do the right thing
and invite his resignation on the back of these embarrassing findings?
The PRESIDENT : Leader of the House,
I think the last part of the question was probably out of order, so you can
respond appropriately.
GOVERNMENT — TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE
1068. Hon AARON STONEHOUSE to the Leader of the House
representing the Premier:
I refer the Premier to the judgement
handed down in the Supreme Court on 2 October 2020 granting relief to the Town
of Cambridge upon the grounds that the proposed actions by the Minister for
Local Government—namely, his threat to suspend the council—had
no basis in jurisdictional fact and were unreasonable and disproportionate.
(1) What
discussions, if any, have taken place between the Minister for Local Government
and the Premier regarding the proposed suspension of the Town of Cambridge
council?
(2) What was the
cost to the taxpayer of pursuing what appears to have been little more than the
minister's personal vendetta against a council whose philosophy he
disagrees with?
(3) What
additional costs are likely to accrue to the taxpayer in the coming months as a
result of this case?
(4) Does the
minister retain the Premier's confidence or will he do the right thing
and invite his resignation on the back of these embarrassing findings?
The PRESIDENT : Leader of the House,
I think the last part of the question was probably out of order, so you can
respond appropriately.
AnswerView source ↗
I certainly will; thanks very much,
Madam President.
(1) None.
(2) The premise of the honourable
member's question is incorrect.
(3) Future costs resulting from the
actions taken by the Town of Cambridge cannot be determined.
(4) The Premier has full confidence
in the minister.
Madam President.
(1) None.
(2) The premise of the honourable
member's question is incorrect.
(3) Future costs resulting from the
actions taken by the Town of Cambridge cannot be determined.
(4) The Premier has full confidence
in the minister.
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.