Mr. Kelly accuses the Premier of opposing a shark deterrent device proposal solely because the opposition proposed it first. The Premier denies endorsing a commercial product and falsely implying guaranteed safety.

AnsweredQoN 797Legislative Assembly
Asked
13 October 2016
Portfolio
Premier

QuestionView source ↗

SHARKS — DETERRENT DEVICES
797. Mr D.J. KELLY to the Premier:
I have a supplementary question. Is
it not the truth that given that the PremierXXX ###XXXs
response is so shallow, the only reason he is opposed to this proposal is that
we proposed it first?

AnswerView source ↗

My goodness! ZZZ### ZZZWe proposed it''! What a fool!
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : Thank you! Premier.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : Did we do the research before or after the oppositionXXX ###XXXs policy?
Mr D.J. Kelly : ItXXX ###XXXs your research!
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
Yes, but we did not propose it. We did the research into Shark Shields and
other electronic devices, and all of that is appropriate, but it is a big step,
a reckless step, for a government to come out and endorse a commercial product
and give the message out there that, ZZZ### ZZZIf you
buy one of these at our subsidised price, you are safe''. That is
something a government should never do.
The SPEAKER : That
concludes question time.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more