❓ WA Minister addresses concerns about Natural Heritage Trust funding cessation and salinity task force report, blaming the federal government for delays in signing the intergovernmental agreement and cost-shifting.
AnsweredQoN 720Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Given that the Natural Heritage Trust fund money ceases on 30 September 2002, and the Premier has clearly indicated that the Government has no intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement with the Commonwealth this financial year, can the minister inform the House - (1) What the State Government intends to do to support hundreds of land care volunteers and the paid land care community officers who will run out of funding on 30 September? (2) When will the minister respond to the salinity task force report, which was presented five months ago on 11 September 2001, as presentation of the report was given as an excuse in the midyear budget review for deferring $4.2 million in salinity funding? Dr EDWARDS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
(1) What the State Government intends to do to support hundreds of land care volunteers and the paid land care community officers who will run out of funding on 30 September? (2) When will the minister respond to the salinity task force report, which was presented five months ago on 11 September 2001, as presentation of the report was given as an excuse in the midyear budget review for deferring $4.2 million in salinity funding? Dr EDWARDS replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
(2) When will the minister respond to the salinity task force report, which was presented five months ago on 11 September 2001, as presentation of the report was given as an excuse in the midyear budget review for deferring $4.2 million in salinity funding? Dr EDWARDS replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
Dr EDWARDS replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
(1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
(1) What the State Government intends to do to support hundreds of land care volunteers and the paid land care community officers who will run out of funding on 30 September? (2) When will the minister respond to the salinity task force report, which was presented five months ago on 11 September 2001, as presentation of the report was given as an excuse in the midyear budget review for deferring $4.2 million in salinity funding? Dr EDWARDS replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
(2) When will the minister respond to the salinity task force report, which was presented five months ago on 11 September 2001, as presentation of the report was given as an excuse in the midyear budget review for deferring $4.2 million in salinity funding? Dr EDWARDS replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
Dr EDWARDS replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
(1)-(2) First, this State Government has every intention of signing the intergovernmental agreement on salinity. I have been trying solidly for one year to do that. I have met with the federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage. I have written to him twice and have had no reply. I have written to the new minister and invited him to do an inspection. Again, I am waiting for a reply. I have sent ministerial staff to Melbourne to meet with Mr Kemp’s staff. I understand there was a positive meeting, but we are yet to see anything flow from it. Members opposite blame us for the delay, but they should pick up their pens, and use their faxes and phones to contact their coalition colleagues, because they are the barriers. Similarly, the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has the prime responsibility for the Natural Heritage Trust, but I am very happy to comment on it. The difficulty is that the federal Government is now saying that its federal money will be matched. That is a way for the Commonwealth to save its own budget hide and to cost shift. All the Labor ministers for agriculture and the environment disagree with that. We have had a national telephone hook-up. We are in the process of writing to the Prime Minister. Mr Trenorden interjected. Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
Dr EDWARDS: I am talking about the NHT II, which the member would know if he had been listening. All the relevant ministers are writing to the federal minister saying that that is not acceptable. The federal Government is also trying to bypass this Government; again, we have said that although we might cop that, we want consideration to be given to our views and the role of local government in this area. The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
The salinity task force prepared an excellent report, which we are in the final stages of pulling together as a total government response. I anticipate that that will be in Cabinet very soon. The task force said that when we spend money on salinity, there is no point in salt and peppering it across the landscape; we must be strategic. I give full credit to the previous State Salinity Council, which started work on an investment framework. Unfortunately, that has taken a long time, but it needed to workshop that to ensure it had the full understanding of the community. I will make an announcement about that in due course. I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
I appreciate that members opposite are concerned about salinity, but if they want to help us, they should shake their federal colleagues and get a response from them.
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.