❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding the purchase of land for the Rockingham Lakes Regional Park, focusing on tendering processes, potential conflicts of interest with contractors, and environmental impact of fire prevention measures. The response reveals some irregularities and lack of formal processes.
AnsweredQoN 3392Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Regarding the Stakehill Wetland and further to question on notice No. 2607 on 11 October 2005, I ask -
(1) Has the properties lot 598 and 599 been purchased and will the wetland portion be included in the Rockingham Lakes Regional Park?
(2) What price per hectare is being paid for properties purchased by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC)?
(3) In regard to the tendering process, were competitive quotes sought for the works specified?
(4) If yes to (3), from whom?
(5) Is Eco-hire and Eco Firebreaks owned by the same person?
(6) If yes to (5), was this person previously an employee of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DPI)?
(7) If yes to (6), was this person paid out with a disability from the DPI?
(8) If yes to (7), has this person now recovered from his disability such that he can now work as a contractor for the Department?
(9) Does this person or Eco-hire or Eco Firebreaks contract out to third parties?
(10) Does Eco-hire or Eco Firebreaks hold spraying and health licences?
(11) If yes to (10), when were they obtained?
(12) With regard to the environmental impact of spraying on the wetland, were fire breaks sprayed within the Conservation Category Wetland area?
(13) What environmental assessment was carried out before the spraying?
(14) In regard to question (22) from question No. 2607, what liability is there from either the lessee or the WAPC for persons who have lost property as a result of the fire escaping from this property?
(15) Was this property insured by either the Lessee or the agency?
(16) Can the Minister provide copies of the management plans for all properties purchased?
(17) Have these plans been provided to the Bushfire brigade?
(18) If no to (17), why not?
(1) Has the properties lot 598 and 599 been purchased and will the wetland portion be included in the Rockingham Lakes Regional Park?
(2) What price per hectare is being paid for properties purchased by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC)?
(3) In regard to the tendering process, were competitive quotes sought for the works specified?
(4) If yes to (3), from whom?
(5) Is Eco-hire and Eco Firebreaks owned by the same person?
(6) If yes to (5), was this person previously an employee of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DPI)?
(7) If yes to (6), was this person paid out with a disability from the DPI?
(8) If yes to (7), has this person now recovered from his disability such that he can now work as a contractor for the Department?
(9) Does this person or Eco-hire or Eco Firebreaks contract out to third parties?
(10) Does Eco-hire or Eco Firebreaks hold spraying and health licences?
(11) If yes to (10), when were they obtained?
(12) With regard to the environmental impact of spraying on the wetland, were fire breaks sprayed within the Conservation Category Wetland area?
(13) What environmental assessment was carried out before the spraying?
(14) In regard to question (22) from question No. 2607, what liability is there from either the lessee or the WAPC for persons who have lost property as a result of the fire escaping from this property?
(15) Was this property insured by either the Lessee or the agency?
(16) Can the Minister provide copies of the management plans for all properties purchased?
(17) Have these plans been provided to the Bushfire brigade?
(18) If no to (17), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
29 June 2006
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
79 days
(1) Yes (2) The market price per hectare is variable relative to the size of the property, existing use, land capability and development on the individual property concerned. (3) & (4) In respect of 'the tendering process', it is presumed that you refer to the fencing, cleanup, weed spraying and firebreaks as asked in Question on Notice 2607. As advised in my response to part (7) of that Question, "No. (did not go out to tender), and "Current scopes of works other than demolition and contract mowing/slashing are too small to require written tender. As additional lands are purchased and scope of future works is identified tenders will be called for specific works. As required under the Supply Commission/DPI guidelines, verbal quotes were obtained for the job at Stakehill Swamp. Eco-Hire was selected as the lowest quote." (4) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI) has established policies and guidelines on the contracting of goods and services in accordance with State Supply Commission policies. Quotes were sought for fire control works including slashing, with DSG Contracting from Baldivis the successful contractor. (5) I am advised that the name "eco-firebreaks" is not a business name. This was an error in the advice provided by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure in answer to Question on Notice No. 2607. (6) The owner/operator of Eco-Hire was an employee of the former Ministry for Planning for some 20 years where he was engaged in a park management role. (7) The Department of Planning and Infrastructure advise the person was not paid-out with a disability. (8) N/A (9) It is understood that Eco-Hire does engage third parties where there is a requirement to use other equipment or machinery not available from its own resources. This is not a breach of policy and sub contracting is allowed in most forms of contract works. (10) Eco-hire is a sole person enterprise whose owner is a qualified horticulturist with experience in the use of herbicides in turf and park management. The department has become aware that the owner of Eco-hire does not hold a current Health Department licence governing the use of herbicides and the firm will therefore not be further engaged for spraying until this is regularised. (11) N/A (12) No (13) Environmental assessment is not undertaken for this activity and the sprays used are licensed to be applied in this type of situation. (14) The facts relating to the fire remain open and the WAPC does not accept any liability in relation to the fire. If a party feels they have lost property and have a grievance against the WAPC, that can be pursued with the Commission by making a claim. (15) All WAPC properties are insured. (16) Management plans are not prepared for individual WAPC properties that may be acquired for a variety of purposes. An overall management plan will be prepared for the Stakehill land, that will ultimately form part of the Rockingham Lakes Regional Park, when the final boundaries of the Parks and Recreation reservation are determined under Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1050/33. (17) The local authority fire officers are aware of fire prevention measures on WAPC land and they inspect the area to ensure compliance with the Bush Fires Act by private and government landowners. Details of firebreaks have been provided to the Baldivis Volunteer Bush Fire Brigade. (18) N/A
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.