❓ Minister MacTiernan refutes claims of a 10-month delay in the Port Kennedy resort project rescue, providing a timeline and expressing optimism for a sustainable agreement with new proponents. She criticizes a West Australian article as inaccurate.
AnsweredQoN 678Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PORT KENNEDY RESORT PROJECT, RESCUE
In there any truth in the report in The West Australian last Saturday that there had been a 10-month delay in the ministerial decision on whether a deal to rescue the Port Kennedy resort project could proceed? Ms MacTIERNAN
In there any truth in the report in The West Australian last Saturday that there had been a 10-month delay in the ministerial decision on whether a deal to rescue the Port Kennedy resort project could proceed? Ms MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I know he was absolutely outraged when he read the article in the newspaper on Saturday, so I thank him for the opportunity to address the issue. The member has had a very active role in overseeing the progress of this important matter. The “Herd on the Terrace” article is a complete load of bull. The anonymous bovine journalist had made no attempt whatsoever to verify the story, and he got it 100 per cent wrong. There is no deal before me awaiting approval or otherwise. Late last week, an in-principle agreement was finally reached between the administrators, financiers, a substitute proponent and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. I expect to receive a report on this proposal within the next two weeks, and I hope it will be able to be settled early in the new year. I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
Ms MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I know he was absolutely outraged when he read the article in the newspaper on Saturday, so I thank him for the opportunity to address the issue. The member has had a very active role in overseeing the progress of this important matter. The “Herd on the Terrace” article is a complete load of bull. The anonymous bovine journalist had made no attempt whatsoever to verify the story, and he got it 100 per cent wrong. There is no deal before me awaiting approval or otherwise. Late last week, an in-principle agreement was finally reached between the administrators, financiers, a substitute proponent and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. I expect to receive a report on this proposal within the next two weeks, and I hope it will be able to be settled early in the new year. I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I know he was absolutely outraged when he read the article in the newspaper on Saturday, so I thank him for the opportunity to address the issue. The member has had a very active role in overseeing the progress of this important matter. The “Herd on the Terrace” article is a complete load of bull. The anonymous bovine journalist had made no attempt whatsoever to verify the story, and he got it 100 per cent wrong. There is no deal before me awaiting approval or otherwise. Late last week, an in-principle agreement was finally reached between the administrators, financiers, a substitute proponent and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. I expect to receive a report on this proposal within the next two weeks, and I hope it will be able to be settled early in the new year. I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
The “Herd on the Terrace” article is a complete load of bull. The anonymous bovine journalist had made no attempt whatsoever to verify the story, and he got it 100 per cent wrong. There is no deal before me awaiting approval or otherwise. Late last week, an in-principle agreement was finally reached between the administrators, financiers, a substitute proponent and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. I expect to receive a report on this proposal within the next two weeks, and I hope it will be able to be settled early in the new year. I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
Ms MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I know he was absolutely outraged when he read the article in the newspaper on Saturday, so I thank him for the opportunity to address the issue. The member has had a very active role in overseeing the progress of this important matter. The “Herd on the Terrace” article is a complete load of bull. The anonymous bovine journalist had made no attempt whatsoever to verify the story, and he got it 100 per cent wrong. There is no deal before me awaiting approval or otherwise. Late last week, an in-principle agreement was finally reached between the administrators, financiers, a substitute proponent and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. I expect to receive a report on this proposal within the next two weeks, and I hope it will be able to be settled early in the new year. I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I know he was absolutely outraged when he read the article in the newspaper on Saturday, so I thank him for the opportunity to address the issue. The member has had a very active role in overseeing the progress of this important matter. The “Herd on the Terrace” article is a complete load of bull. The anonymous bovine journalist had made no attempt whatsoever to verify the story, and he got it 100 per cent wrong. There is no deal before me awaiting approval or otherwise. Late last week, an in-principle agreement was finally reached between the administrators, financiers, a substitute proponent and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. I expect to receive a report on this proposal within the next two weeks, and I hope it will be able to be settled early in the new year. I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
The “Herd on the Terrace” article is a complete load of bull. The anonymous bovine journalist had made no attempt whatsoever to verify the story, and he got it 100 per cent wrong. There is no deal before me awaiting approval or otherwise. Late last week, an in-principle agreement was finally reached between the administrators, financiers, a substitute proponent and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. I expect to receive a report on this proposal within the next two weeks, and I hope it will be able to be settled early in the new year. I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
I will give a time line of the project, so that members are absolutely clear about what has gone on with this project. The Port Kennedy resort project, as many members know, went into voluntary administration in November 2000. My predecessor, the then Minister for Planning, served notice of default on an agreement with the State Government that would have seen a resort developed in return for title to crown land. By February, that default was proven and the proponent no longer had the right to proceed under that agreement. Therefore, in early April I invited submissions for assignment of these development rights to a new developer. In July, the Government finally received a submission which had some merit but was not a submission with which we were prepared to proceed without a great deal more negotiation. Since that time, and ably assisted by the member for Peel, negotiations have continued between the administrator, the proponents and a variety of other persons to try to develop an acceptable deal. This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
This is a simple matter. The Government must ensure that the development rights are given to a business that has the resources and the capacity to complete the development. The conditions of assignment must ensure that the resort development proceeds. There is a deal of frustration in the Port Kennedy area about the way in which the project has languished in the past eight years. We do not want to see a continuation of the problems that have plagued the project to date. We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
We are determined that before we enter into a new agreement we have an agreement with a set of sustainable proponents. We are pleased now that a number of substantial companies have agreed to an equity participation in the project, which of course gives us increased confidence in its future. I acknowledge that both the members for Rockingham and Peel have repeatedly discussed this project with me. We are concerned that the area has been under a cloud for the past eight years because the proposal has failed to proceed. However, as I said, we are determined to enter into a deal with a proponent who has the capacity to deliver a good and environmentally sound project. I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
I say to our friends at The West Australian that poor old “Herd on the Terrace” obviously has foot in mouth disease or he may simply be a mad cow! He certainly will not receive a Walkley award unless he lifts his game.
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.