❓ Hon Giz Watson questions the valuation of native forest standing timber in WA, specifically regarding discrepancies between 2000-01 and 2009. Hon Robyn McSweeney explains the valuation method based on net present value of future harvests.
AnsweredQoN 540Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
NATIVE FOREST STANDING TIMBER
(1) Why was native forest standing timber carried at nil value in 2000–01? (2) Why was the current native forest standing timber valued at $12 093 000 in 2009? (3) Why was the non-current native forest standing timber valued at $92 912 000 in 2009? (4) What is the difference between the current native forest standing timber and the non-current native forest standing timber? (5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY
(1) Why was native forest standing timber carried at nil value in 2000–01? (2) Why was the current native forest standing timber valued at $12 093 000 in 2009? (3) Why was the non-current native forest standing timber valued at $92 912 000 in 2009? (4) What is the difference between the current native forest standing timber and the non-current native forest standing timber? (5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(2) Why was the current native forest standing timber valued at $12 093 000 in 2009? (3) Why was the non-current native forest standing timber valued at $92 912 000 in 2009? (4) What is the difference between the current native forest standing timber and the non-current native forest standing timber? (5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(3) Why was the non-current native forest standing timber valued at $92 912 000 in 2009? (4) What is the difference between the current native forest standing timber and the non-current native forest standing timber? (5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(4) What is the difference between the current native forest standing timber and the non-current native forest standing timber? (5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(2) Why was the current native forest standing timber valued at $12 093 000 in 2009? (3) Why was the non-current native forest standing timber valued at $92 912 000 in 2009? (4) What is the difference between the current native forest standing timber and the non-current native forest standing timber? (5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(3) Why was the non-current native forest standing timber valued at $92 912 000 in 2009? (4) What is the difference between the current native forest standing timber and the non-current native forest standing timber? (5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(4) What is the difference between the current native forest standing timber and the non-current native forest standing timber? (5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(5) How was the figure of $12 093 000 for the value of current native forest standing timber arrived at? (6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(6) How was the figure of $92 912 000 for the value of non-current native forest standing timber arrived at? Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(1) An explanation of why native forest standing timber was valued at nil in 2000–01 can be found in the Forest Products Commission’s audited 2000–01 financial accounts at note 2.4, “Valuation of non-current assets”, on page 53 of the FPC 2000–01 annual report. (2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
(2)–(6) The value of native forest standing timber termed “fair value” in the relevant note to the 2008–09 accounts is represented by the net present value of the future harvest and sale of timber available for harvest. The net present value includes future net revenues less the costs of regeneration from future harvest operations. In accordance with the relevant Australian accounting standard, the NPV is reported in the FPC balance sheet as a current proportion representing the value attributable to the next 12 months’ harvest, and the non-current portion representing that value attributable to harvest beyond 12 months. I also refer the honourable member to note 2.15 of the FPC 2008–09 annual report.
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.