❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding the government's review of native timber royalties and a previous review of log prices, with details on tenders, consultant appointment, report deadlines, and release of the report.
AnsweredQoN 996Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) What has the Government done to fulfil its election commitment to immediately initiate a review of current royalties for native timber and the process by which they are levied to ensure that royalties reflect the true value of our native timber? In relation to the review of log prices initiated by the previous Government in 2000 into native forest hardwood - (2) When were the tenders requested, and when did they close? (3) When and which consultant was appointed? (4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
In relation to the review of log prices initiated by the previous Government in 2000 into native forest hardwood - (2) When were the tenders requested, and when did they close? (3) When and which consultant was appointed? (4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(2) When were the tenders requested, and when did they close? (3) When and which consultant was appointed? (4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(3) When and which consultant was appointed? (4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
In relation to the review of log prices initiated by the previous Government in 2000 into native forest hardwood - (2) When were the tenders requested, and when did they close? (3) When and which consultant was appointed? (4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(2) When were the tenders requested, and when did they close? (3) When and which consultant was appointed? (4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(3) When and which consultant was appointed? (4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(4) When was the report due? (5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(5) Has the report been received? (6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(6) Will the minister please table and release the report? (7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(7) If not, why not? Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
Mr LOGAN replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answers provided to me by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries are as follows - In relation to the review of log prices for the supply of native forest hardwood from government-owned lands initiated by the previous Government in 2000 - (1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks. Dr Woollard: I have a supplementary question. The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
(1) The tender was advertised in both the Australian and The West Australian newspapers on 13 May 2000. (2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(2) Tenders closed on 6 June 2000. (3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(3) Chandler Fraser Keating of Auckland, New Zealand was appointed as the consultant on 26 June 2000. (4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(4) The stage 1 report was originally due on 30 September 2000. However, this deadline was extended so that the report could take account of changed circumstances associated with the Government’s forest policy. (6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(6) Yes, a report has been received. (a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
(a) The stage 1 report was received on 22 August 2000. (b) Uncertainty surrounding the level of future yields and the forest management plan has prevented meaningful analysis of price and its implications. (7) Yes. The minister expects to be in a position to release the report within the next few weeks.
The SPEAKER: Order! There needs to be some notice of a question for a parliamentary secretary to answer it. Presumably a supplementary question is one for which no notice has been given. Therefore, I fail to see how a supplementary question can be allowed unless some part of that question has not been read out. Is it in relation to advice that has been given? Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
Dr Woollard: Mr Speaker, part (8) of the written question has not been addressed by the parliamentary secretary. Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
Mr LOGAN: I did not address it because the question was not asked. Given the fact that the member for Alfred Cove gave some notice of the question, I will answer it. However, the member did not ask the question in the House today. The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
The answer to part (8) of the member’s written question is - The Government has ensured that the first stage of the review takes account of the changed policy circumstances and is currently considering how the price review should best be implemented in the light of the industry restructure and the forest management plan.
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.