Mr. Redman questions the Treasurer about a potential change in the government's position on unilaterally amending State Agreement Acts, particularly in light of concerns regarding Mineralogy and Mr. Palmer's actions and their impact on investment certainty. The Treasurer reaffirms the importance of investment certainty but hints at potential action to protect ongoing investment.

AnsweredQoN 379Legislative Assembly
Asked
15 May 2019
Portfolio
Treasurer

QuestionView source ↗

STATE AGREEMENT ACTS —
AMENDMENTS
379. Mr D.T. REDMAN to the Treasurer:
I
will ask a question in a second, but I would also like to welcome Matt Birney,
who is gone, and Paul Omodei, who is here. Significantly, both are former
regional members of Parliament and Hon Paul Omodei is also shire president of Manjimup. We know that my seat is of a good pedigree; he was also a former
member for Warren–Blackwood. It is great to have Paul in the gallery
today.
The SPEAKER : Great preamble,
member. Can we have the question, please?
Mr D.T. REDMAN : I refer to the
Treasurer's answer to a question in the other place on 17 May 2017. It
states —
The state government does not intend
to unilaterally amend such agreements, as this would clearly be contrary to
their spirit and intent and undermine Western Australia's reputation as
a safe and stable investment destination.
Has the Treasurer's position
now changed?

AnswerView source ↗

One thing that is unique to Western Australia
is state agreements. This is a Western Australian creation, if you like, and
the value of them has been highlighted by members on both sides of this house
over decades. When we look at Hansard , we see that it provides certainty
around investment—that is the key. We need certainty around investment
because this state is very heavily reliant on that foreign capital. We want to
ensure that when we are investing under
those state agreement acts—in most cases billions of dollars over long
periods of time—we need to provide that certainty. I assume the
member's question is in respect of the issue around Mineralogy and Mr Palmer.
The Premier has outlined this quite clearly. What we need to see with those
agreements is the certainty that has been provided by every other state
agreement to ensure that the investment that has been made by Citic Pacific—again,
in the billions—is certainly protected. I want to ensure that
internationally, people and organisations feel as though they can invest
securely and safety. That is why, for example, we did not think as an
opposition and now as a government that unilaterally changing a state agreement
to change, for example, the taxes, royalties and moneys paid, which have underlined
decades of very significant investment, was a sensible thing to do. It would
have sent an appalling message. But I suspect in light of what is happening
with Mr Palmer and Mineralogy, and the fact that they are a clear threat to
future investment of capital in Western Australia, every member of Parliament
in this place would want to do what they can to protect ongoing investment in Western
Australia.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more