❓ Question regarding a potential payout to the former Managing Director of Western Power, Dr. Stephen van der Mye, and the Minister's involvement in the contractual arrangements. The Minister avoids directly answering the question, stating the board decided against a payout and accuses the opposition of wanting to waste taxpayer money.
AnsweredQoN 52Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to the article on page 1 of The West Australian on 24 February regarding possible payouts to Dr Stephen van der Mye following his removal as Managing Director of Western Power. (1) Will the minister admit that he agreed to a clause in Dr van der Mye’s contract of employment providing for the payment of an amount equivalent to six months remuneration or the employee remuneration equivalent to the balance of the term, whichever was more favourable, upon termination of employment by Western Power? (2) As such, will the minister admit that there is now a very real possibility that the Government will be forced to pay more than $200 000 to a person who no longer works in Perth and still lives in Melbourne? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
(1) Will the minister admit that he agreed to a clause in Dr van der Mye’s contract of employment providing for the payment of an amount equivalent to six months remuneration or the employee remuneration equivalent to the balance of the term, whichever was more favourable, upon termination of employment by Western Power? (2) As such, will the minister admit that there is now a very real possibility that the Government will be forced to pay more than $200 000 to a person who no longer works in Perth and still lives in Melbourne? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
(2) As such, will the minister admit that there is now a very real possibility that the Government will be forced to pay more than $200 000 to a person who no longer works in Perth and still lives in Melbourne? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
(1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
(1) Will the minister admit that he agreed to a clause in Dr van der Mye’s contract of employment providing for the payment of an amount equivalent to six months remuneration or the employee remuneration equivalent to the balance of the term, whichever was more favourable, upon termination of employment by Western Power? (2) As such, will the minister admit that there is now a very real possibility that the Government will be forced to pay more than $200 000 to a person who no longer works in Perth and still lives in Melbourne? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
(2) As such, will the minister admit that there is now a very real possibility that the Government will be forced to pay more than $200 000 to a person who no longer works in Perth and still lives in Melbourne? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
(1)-(2) The board of Western Power has determined that no offer of a payout will be made to Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the Government wholeheartedly supports the board in that decision. Only the Opposition appears to want to see taxpayers’ money wasted on this matter. I concurred with the board’s decision to appoint Dr Stephen van der Mye, and the board’s summary of the contractual arrangements. I do not support the proposition put before the House by the member for Darling Range. The board has very clearly made a decision not to offer a payout to Dr van der Mye, and the Government supports the board’s decision. Earlier on during question time, the House was debating the question of privatisation. The Opposition appeared to have the view that this was some distant historical anomaly with which it was not really associated, although I was able to point out the direct involvement of the present Leader of the Opposition. However, my attention has been drawn to notice of motion No 45 on the Legislative Council Notice Paper. The motion deals with the question of electricity supply in non-metropolitan areas and reads, in part - And the House notes that such work is required to begin at once, whatever the outcome of current legislative changes, to maintain the viability and sale value of the distribution network. Dr G.I. Gallop: Sale value? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: Sale value! The notice of motion was given by Hon Bill Stretch on 12 December 2003. That shows how current the idea of the privatisation of Western Power is in Liberal Party thinking. It is part of a motion that the Liberal Party has put before the Parliament.
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.