❓ A parliamentary question addresses the Minister for Resources regarding his past criticisms of the Department of Industry and Resources, specifically concerning communication and policy delivery. The Minister defends the department's performance and clarifies his previous statements.
AnsweredQoN 631Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY AND RESOURCES - MINISTER’S COMMENTS
I refer to the minister’s mark of four out of seven for the Department of Industry and Resources in its most recent annual report and ask - (1) Does the minister still stand by his comments that he has, according to my notes, “been disappointed with the quality of the communication between the department and key stakeholders”, and that he has “been disappointed with the pace of delivery of Government policy”? (2) How are these comments helpful in resolving the growing problems in the Department of Industry and Resources? (3) Why is the minister despised by his own department? Mr F.M. LOGAN
I refer to the minister’s mark of four out of seven for the Department of Industry and Resources in its most recent annual report and ask - (1) Does the minister still stand by his comments that he has, according to my notes, “been disappointed with the quality of the communication between the department and key stakeholders”, and that he has “been disappointed with the pace of delivery of Government policy”? (2) How are these comments helpful in resolving the growing problems in the Department of Industry and Resources? (3) Why is the minister despised by his own department? Mr F.M. LOGAN
AnswerView source ↗
That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
(1) Does the minister still stand by his comments that he has, according to my notes, “been disappointed with the quality of the communication between the department and key stakeholders”, and that he has “been disappointed with the pace of delivery of Government policy”? (2) How are these comments helpful in resolving the growing problems in the Department of Industry and Resources? (3) Why is the minister despised by his own department? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
(2) How are these comments helpful in resolving the growing problems in the Department of Industry and Resources? (3) Why is the minister despised by his own department? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
(3) Why is the minister despised by his own department? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
(1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up.
Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
(1) Does the minister still stand by his comments that he has, according to my notes, “been disappointed with the quality of the communication between the department and key stakeholders”, and that he has “been disappointed with the pace of delivery of Government policy”? (2) How are these comments helpful in resolving the growing problems in the Department of Industry and Resources? (3) Why is the minister despised by his own department? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
(2) How are these comments helpful in resolving the growing problems in the Department of Industry and Resources? (3) Why is the minister despised by his own department? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
(3) Why is the minister despised by his own department? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
That is a new one! A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
A government member: We like you! Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
Mr F.M. LOGAN : Yes! (1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
(1)-(3) The question that was put is very strange. The comments I and my colleagues have made were put in the annual report. One media report referred quite accurately to the views the member has expressed, and the other media report was about criticism of the department’s resource section. I have never made a bad comment about the amazing work the department is doing in mining approvals, exploration approvals and the management of the processes of those approvals. The department is doing a sterling job in a very difficult situation. Last year, for example, the department received the greatest number of mining applications that had ever been received in Western Australia, and it dealt with the greatest number of applications that a government department has ever dealt with. In order to support the department further, my good friend the Treasurer has approved a $3.5 million injection into the department to allow the employment of more people to deal with the mining backlog. I have already spoken about this in Parliament. The department and the government have made a commitment to reduce the backlog from 18 700, where it currently stands, to approximately 5 000 over a two-year period. I am advised by the department that we can achieve that. My comments about the department went to two issues. One was the issue of communications, and there were a couple of cases - I will not deal with them here, because it is between me and the department - in which I was not happy that people within the department had failed to provide advice to their own management. Never mind me; they failed to provide certain advice to their management about what they were doing. I was not advised of this, and that led to a difficult situation for the director general, the deputy director general and me. The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up. Dr S.C. Thomas : So you acknowledge that there’s a problem between government policy and the department? Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
The second issue concerned the way in which the department has dealt with our four pillars of industrial development policy. Quite rightly, I wanted the process to be speeded up.
Mr F.M. LOGAN : No, there are no problems. It is simply normal managerial advice to the department to deal with things in a timely and appropriate manner. That is all.
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.