❓ A WA parliamentary question addresses concerns about the Port Kennedy Land Conservation District Committee's operational status and requests information from the Minister for Fair Trading.
AnsweredQoN 284Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Mr Michael Eaton of the Ministry of Fair Trading has written to the Port Kennedy Land Conservation District Committee saying that the Commissioner for Fair Trading has reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for the preceding 12 months. (1) Will the minister explain what is the basis of the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for the past 12 months? (2) Has the commissioner been provided with information about the Port Kennedy LCDC? (3) Will the minister table the information; and, if not, why not? Hon N.F. MOORE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(1) Will the minister explain what is the basis of the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for the past 12 months? (2) Has the commissioner been provided with information about the Port Kennedy LCDC? (3) Will the minister table the information; and, if not, why not? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(2) Has the commissioner been provided with information about the Port Kennedy LCDC? (3) Will the minister table the information; and, if not, why not? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(3) Will the minister table the information; and, if not, why not? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
[See paper 338.]
(1) Will the minister explain what is the basis of the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for the past 12 months? (2) Has the commissioner been provided with information about the Port Kennedy LCDC? (3) Will the minister table the information; and, if not, why not? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(2) Has the commissioner been provided with information about the Port Kennedy LCDC? (3) Will the minister table the information; and, if not, why not? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(3) Will the minister table the information; and, if not, why not? Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
Hon N.F. MOORE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(1) The basis for the reasonable cause to believe that the Port Kennedy LCDC has been inoperative for 12 months is as follows: A letter dated 29 June 1999 was received from the Ministry for Planning advising that it believed that the association had been inoperative for the previous 12 months. A letter from the Ministry of Fair Trading dated 22 December was sent to the association requesting confirmation that the association was active. A reply received on 29 December stated that as the LCDC was involved in a Supreme Court action, it objected to the request for specific evidence. Because of the Supreme Court action, the Ministry of Fair Trading agreed to review the issue in six months. A letter was sent to the LCDC on 30 August 2000 requesting within 28 days the supply of the evidence previously denied. No response was received. A further letter was sent to the LCDC on 11 September repeating the earlier request and advising that should no response be received by 25 September, the commissioner would commence proceedings to cancel the incorporation of the LCDC. Again, no response was received. A notice of proposed cancellation of incorporation was issued to the association on 5 October 2000. The association has two months to respond to the notice. (2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(2) Yes. (3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
(3) I table the information. [See paper 338.]
[See paper 338.]
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.