❓ Hon. Paddy Embry questions the accuracy of a news report regarding Cabinet's in-principle support for egg market deregulation. Hon. Kim Chance confirms the report is substantially correct and the decision was made considering the public interest under the National Competition Policy.
AnsweredQoN 1091Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
An article in today’s edition of The West Australian reported that Cabinet had given in-principle support to deregulation of the egg market. (1) Is the report correct? (2) If yes, has the decision been reached on public interest principles? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
(1) Is the report correct? (2) If yes, has the decision been reached on public interest principles? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
(2) If yes, has the decision been reached on public interest principles? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
(1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
(2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
(1) Is the report correct? (2) If yes, has the decision been reached on public interest principles? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
(2) If yes, has the decision been reached on public interest principles? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
I thank Hon Paddy Embry for the question, albeit, without notice. (1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
(1) Yes, the report is substantially correct. Cabinet has made an in-principle decision that will result ultimately in the deregulation of the egg industry in Western Australia. (2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
(2) Yes. The decision has been made in the context of the public interest test. The process of the National Competition Policy decision is that the minister in charge of the Act being reviewed is required to identify and compare developments within that legislation and, upon identification of anticompetitive elements, identify whether it provides a substantive public benefit, which then becomes the basis of the argument for retention, if that is indicated. The case for retention of regulation of the egg industry is not strong. Similarly, the case for a quantifiable public benefit is not strong. However, the detail of the issue is more important than the in-principle decision. The detail of the decision around the deregulation of this industry is still a matter for cabinet deliberation. Members can anticipate that deregulation will occur over a period. Questions surround the distribution of the industry’s assets, which will be central to whether it has industry support.
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.