❓ Opposition Leader questions Premier about a reported $35 million overpayment in a voluntary separation program. Premier denies overpayment, stating it was a component of redundancy packages and confirmed by the Auditor General's office.
AnsweredQoN 917Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
VOLUNTARY SEPARATION PROGRAM 2013–14 —
AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT
917. Mr M. McGOWAN to the Premier:
Mr Speaker —
Mr
V.A. Catania interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for North West Central, I call you to order for the third
time.
Mr
V.A. Catania interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for North West Central, I do not want to hear from you
again, otherwise I am going to ask you to leave the chamber.
Mr
M. McGOWAN : My question without notice is to the Premier. I refer to the
Premier's failure yesterday to read the Auditor General's
report referring to the wrongful payment of up to $35 million to 1 112 public
servants taking redundancy under his 2013–14 voluntary separation
program. Once again, I ask —
(1) How many millions of taxpayers'
dollars were wasted because of the mistake?
(2) Given that
the Premier is now going through another redundancy round, will he guarantee
that he will not make this expensive mistake again?
AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT
917. Mr M. McGOWAN to the Premier:
Mr Speaker —
Mr
V.A. Catania interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for North West Central, I call you to order for the third
time.
Mr
V.A. Catania interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Member for North West Central, I do not want to hear from you
again, otherwise I am going to ask you to leave the chamber.
Mr
M. McGOWAN : My question without notice is to the Premier. I refer to the
Premier's failure yesterday to read the Auditor General's
report referring to the wrongful payment of up to $35 million to 1 112 public
servants taking redundancy under his 2013–14 voluntary separation
program. Once again, I ask —
(1) How many millions of taxpayers'
dollars were wasted because of the mistake?
(2) Given that
the Premier is now going through another redundancy round, will he guarantee
that he will not make this expensive mistake again?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2) I
had not looked at the Auditor General's report as at question time
yesterday; I have since. The state government had a voluntary redundancy round
targeted at 1 000 employees. At the end of that round, in fact 1 112 employees
took up voluntary redundancy. The government made a generous offer to them,
because it wanted to make it attractive so that people who were contemplating
leaving the public service would do so. As part of that, and not unusually, a
component of that redundancy package was 20 weeks' pay in lieu of
notice. The total redundancy package for the 1 112 employees cost $119.8 million.
Many were senior, long-serving public servants, and according to the awards,
the payout figure came to that amount. Of that $119 million, $35 million was
the component for 20 weeks' payment in lieu of notice that was paid out
according to the agreement. There was no loss of money; there was no
overpayment; it was the 20-week component of the overall redundancy package,
which of course was unpaid holiday leave, unpaid pro rata long service leave
and so on—all those components. So the $35 million was not wasted; it
was not lost; it was the 20 weeks' pay in lieu of notice and was
entirely in order.
Following the question yesterday, my
office had contact with members of the Auditor General's office and
they confirmed that the report does not state or intend to state that there was
a $35 million overpayment. Once again the Leader of the Opposition got it
wrong.
had not looked at the Auditor General's report as at question time
yesterday; I have since. The state government had a voluntary redundancy round
targeted at 1 000 employees. At the end of that round, in fact 1 112 employees
took up voluntary redundancy. The government made a generous offer to them,
because it wanted to make it attractive so that people who were contemplating
leaving the public service would do so. As part of that, and not unusually, a
component of that redundancy package was 20 weeks' pay in lieu of
notice. The total redundancy package for the 1 112 employees cost $119.8 million.
Many were senior, long-serving public servants, and according to the awards,
the payout figure came to that amount. Of that $119 million, $35 million was
the component for 20 weeks' payment in lieu of notice that was paid out
according to the agreement. There was no loss of money; there was no
overpayment; it was the 20-week component of the overall redundancy package,
which of course was unpaid holiday leave, unpaid pro rata long service leave
and so on—all those components. So the $35 million was not wasted; it
was not lost; it was the 20 weeks' pay in lieu of notice and was
entirely in order.
Following the question yesterday, my
office had contact with members of the Auditor General's office and
they confirmed that the report does not state or intend to state that there was
a $35 million overpayment. Once again the Leader of the Opposition got it
wrong.
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.