❓ Dr. Honey questions the Water Corporation's $148,000 rebranding exercise during a cost of living crisis, highlighting the Minister's lack of prior knowledge. The Minister defends the Water Corporation's overall performance but acknowledges the rebranding proposal was ill-advised and subsequently rejected.
AnsweredQoN 394Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
WATER CORPORATION — REBRANDING
394. Dr D.J. HONEY to the Minister for Water:
I
refer the minister to the public reports about the Water Corporation spending
$148 000 on an unnecessary rebranding public relations exercise during a
time when households are struggling with the cost of living, and, importantly,
to the minister not being made aware of such an important exercise before it
commenced.
(1) How much
money was the Water Corporation intending to spend on the rebranding project;
and how, and when, did the minister become aware of the rebranding exercise?
(2) Does the
minister have any further protocols in place to ensure that proposals like this
are approved by him before public money is wasted in this way?
394. Dr D.J. HONEY to the Minister for Water:
I
refer the minister to the public reports about the Water Corporation spending
$148 000 on an unnecessary rebranding public relations exercise during a
time when households are struggling with the cost of living, and, importantly,
to the minister not being made aware of such an important exercise before it
commenced.
(1) How much
money was the Water Corporation intending to spend on the rebranding project;
and how, and when, did the minister become aware of the rebranding exercise?
(2) Does the
minister have any further protocols in place to ensure that proposals like this
are approved by him before public money is wasted in this way?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the
Leader of the Liberal Party for the question.
(1)–(2) I
think the Water Corporation is actually a really brilliant organisation. When
we look at the work that it does around the
state, we are really lucky to have a publicly owned utility to manage our
water. With regard to the rebranding exercise that the member referred
to—I will give some detail about that in a minute—imagine how
much money would have been spent by that organisation had the former government
stayed in office and privatised it, which is what we have seen traditionally
from members opposite.
Dr D.J. Honey : You make it up
as you go along, don't you?
Mr D.J. KELLY : You talk about
it. You have a history of privatising —
Dr D.J. Honey : You just make
it up as you go along.
Mr D.J. KELLY : You asked a question.
You have a history of privatising state utilities. Imagine how much would have
been spent had you been in government!
Having
said that, the Water Corporation does a wonderful job managing our water supply
from Esperance to Kununurra . It is
dealing with the impacts of climate change. When members opposite were in
government, that is something they told
the Water Corporation it could not talk about. It has implemented a whole range
of hardship policies, following the direction of this government, so
that we have significantly reduced the number of customers who are in hardship. Therefore, I think, overall, it does a brilliant
job. But, like any organisation, it does not get everything right all the time.
The
member is right: the Water Corporation was considering a rebranding program. I found
out about it. My ministerial office received an email on 28 February
telling us that the Water Corporation wanted to talk to us about a proposed
rebranding. One of my staff met with the Water Corporation on 9 March, and the
response given was that it had better brief the minister about that. On 23
March—14 days later—I got a briefing, and I told the Water
Corporation that I could not see any value for customers in going ahead with
rebranding. The first time I heard about it from the Water Corporation was on
23 March, and I told it I did not support it, so the rebranding did not go
ahead. That killed it. That killed it stone dead.
Should the Water Corporation have
spent that money on preparing a proposal to get it to a point at which it
wanted to brief the minister? No. I did not
think it was worthwhile, but that is the attitude I take on this side of the
house. The Water Corporation does a fabulous job in the way it deals
with customers and climate change and the way it makes sure that regional WA in
particular is well serviced. But does it get everything right all the time? No,
it does not. That is why, when I found out about this proposal, I put an end to
it.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please,
members!
Leader of the Liberal Party for the question.
(1)–(2) I
think the Water Corporation is actually a really brilliant organisation. When
we look at the work that it does around the
state, we are really lucky to have a publicly owned utility to manage our
water. With regard to the rebranding exercise that the member referred
to—I will give some detail about that in a minute—imagine how
much money would have been spent by that organisation had the former government
stayed in office and privatised it, which is what we have seen traditionally
from members opposite.
Dr D.J. Honey : You make it up
as you go along, don't you?
Mr D.J. KELLY : You talk about
it. You have a history of privatising —
Dr D.J. Honey : You just make
it up as you go along.
Mr D.J. KELLY : You asked a question.
You have a history of privatising state utilities. Imagine how much would have
been spent had you been in government!
Having
said that, the Water Corporation does a wonderful job managing our water supply
from Esperance to Kununurra . It is
dealing with the impacts of climate change. When members opposite were in
government, that is something they told
the Water Corporation it could not talk about. It has implemented a whole range
of hardship policies, following the direction of this government, so
that we have significantly reduced the number of customers who are in hardship. Therefore, I think, overall, it does a brilliant
job. But, like any organisation, it does not get everything right all the time.
The
member is right: the Water Corporation was considering a rebranding program. I found
out about it. My ministerial office received an email on 28 February
telling us that the Water Corporation wanted to talk to us about a proposed
rebranding. One of my staff met with the Water Corporation on 9 March, and the
response given was that it had better brief the minister about that. On 23
March—14 days later—I got a briefing, and I told the Water
Corporation that I could not see any value for customers in going ahead with
rebranding. The first time I heard about it from the Water Corporation was on
23 March, and I told it I did not support it, so the rebranding did not go
ahead. That killed it. That killed it stone dead.
Should the Water Corporation have
spent that money on preparing a proposal to get it to a point at which it
wanted to brief the minister? No. I did not
think it was worthwhile, but that is the attitude I take on this side of the
house. The Water Corporation does a fabulous job in the way it deals
with customers and climate change and the way it makes sure that regional WA in
particular is well serviced. But does it get everything right all the time? No,
it does not. That is why, when I found out about this proposal, I put an end to
it.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please,
members!
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.