A parliamentary question regarding the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure's decision-making process related to the Millbank on Moore development and Town Planning Scheme 9 in Gingin, specifically concerning legal advice sought and communication with other members of parliament. The Minister clarifies the source and nature of legal advice and denies sending the file to the member for Riverton.

AnsweredQoN 171Legislative Assembly
Asked
5 April 2007
Portfolio
Planning and Infrastructure

QuestionView source ↗

MILLBANK ON MOORE - DECISION BY MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
I refer to the Lombardo decision at Millbank on Moore and to the minister’s response to my question in the Parliament on 28 February 2007 that she received advice from the Crown Solicitor’s Office that she was unable to make a decision on any aspect of town planning scheme 9 in Gingin. (1) Did the minister initiate advice from the office of the Crown Solicitor; and, if so, on what date; and, if not, who did? (2) On what date did the minister receive a reply from the office of the Crown Solicitor, and in what form was it - oral or written? (3) On what date did the minister send the file to the member for Riverton, and what was the date of the memo or recommendation by the minister to the member, referred to in the Corruption and Crime Commission evidence of the member for Riverton as exhibit 12501 on 22 February 2007? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have never said that I took advice from the Crown Solicitor’s Office. Ms S.E. Walker : What did you say? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I would have thought the member for Nedlands would have read the question! I am sure the Attorney General would be well aware of the error, and that indeed it was the State Solicitor, but we are obviously dealing here with an unreconstructed monarchist who has been unable to read the answer that was given. (1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
(1) Did the minister initiate advice from the office of the Crown Solicitor; and, if so, on what date; and, if not, who did? (2) On what date did the minister receive a reply from the office of the Crown Solicitor, and in what form was it - oral or written? (3) On what date did the minister send the file to the member for Riverton, and what was the date of the memo or recommendation by the minister to the member, referred to in the Corruption and Crime Commission evidence of the member for Riverton as exhibit 12501 on 22 February 2007? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have never said that I took advice from the Crown Solicitor’s Office. Ms S.E. Walker : What did you say? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I would have thought the member for Nedlands would have read the question! I am sure the Attorney General would be well aware of the error, and that indeed it was the State Solicitor, but we are obviously dealing here with an unreconstructed monarchist who has been unable to read the answer that was given. (1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
(2) On what date did the minister receive a reply from the office of the Crown Solicitor, and in what form was it - oral or written? (3) On what date did the minister send the file to the member for Riverton, and what was the date of the memo or recommendation by the minister to the member, referred to in the Corruption and Crime Commission evidence of the member for Riverton as exhibit 12501 on 22 February 2007? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have never said that I took advice from the Crown Solicitor’s Office. Ms S.E. Walker : What did you say? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I would have thought the member for Nedlands would have read the question! I am sure the Attorney General would be well aware of the error, and that indeed it was the State Solicitor, but we are obviously dealing here with an unreconstructed monarchist who has been unable to read the answer that was given. (1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
(3) On what date did the minister send the file to the member for Riverton, and what was the date of the memo or recommendation by the minister to the member, referred to in the Corruption and Crime Commission evidence of the member for Riverton as exhibit 12501 on 22 February 2007? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have never said that I took advice from the Crown Solicitor’s Office. Ms S.E. Walker : What did you say? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I would have thought the member for Nedlands would have read the question! I am sure the Attorney General would be well aware of the error, and that indeed it was the State Solicitor, but we are obviously dealing here with an unreconstructed monarchist who has been unable to read the answer that was given. (1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have never said that I took advice from the Crown Solicitor’s Office. Ms S.E. Walker : What did you say? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I would have thought the member for Nedlands would have read the question! I am sure the Attorney General would be well aware of the error, and that indeed it was the State Solicitor, but we are obviously dealing here with an unreconstructed monarchist who has been unable to read the answer that was given. (1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have never said that I took advice from the Crown Solicitor’s Office. Ms S.E. Walker : What did you say? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I would have thought the member for Nedlands would have read the question! I am sure the Attorney General would be well aware of the error, and that indeed it was the State Solicitor, but we are obviously dealing here with an unreconstructed monarchist who has been unable to read the answer that was given. (1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
Ms S.E. Walker : What did you say? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I would have thought the member for Nedlands would have read the question! I am sure the Attorney General would be well aware of the error, and that indeed it was the State Solicitor, but we are obviously dealing here with an unreconstructed monarchist who has been unable to read the answer that was given. (1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I would have thought the member for Nedlands would have read the question! I am sure the Attorney General would be well aware of the error, and that indeed it was the State Solicitor, but we are obviously dealing here with an unreconstructed monarchist who has been unable to read the answer that was given. (1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
(1) Like I have said happened, advice was sought from the State Solicitor’s Office by way of email on 27 March 2006. (2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
(2) Written advice was received from the State Solicitor’s Office in a letter dated 3 April 2006. I cannot tell the member precisely on what date the letter was received. The advice was sought from a departmental officer after my request that such advice be sought. A letter came back from the State Solicitor’s Office in April 2006, and that advice was to the effect that, alas, I was not able to segment the aspects of the Gingin town planning scheme; the Gingin town planning scheme had to be considered as a whole. (3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.
(3) I did not send the file to the member for Riverton. The town planning scheme was presented directly to the then minister by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff while he was acting Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. The date of the memo I sent to the then minister was 7 August 2006.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more