❓ A parliamentary question on notice regarding the alleged unlawful merging of the Water and Rivers Commission with the Department of Environment. The Minister denies any wrongdoing, stating the Commission still exists and the Department of Environment services it.
AnsweredQoN 579Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to her actions to merge the Water and Rivers Commission with the Department of Environment and to the fact that the Water and Rivers Commission is a statutory body, created by law, which therefore cannot be abolished or amalgamated with other agencies without the approval of Parliament. (1) Does the minister remember introducing the Machinery of Government (Water Resources) Amendment Bill into the Parliament to abolish the commission, which did not proceed through the Parliament? (2) Why did the minister subsequently subvert the law by merging the Water and Rivers Commission with the Department of Environment without Parliament’s approval? (3) As the minister’s actions have demonstrated a clear failure to adhere to the lawful requirements of the act for which she is responsible, will the minister resign, or does she think that she and this Labor government are above the law? Dr J.M. EDWARDS
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
(1) Does the minister remember introducing the Machinery of Government (Water Resources) Amendment Bill into the Parliament to abolish the commission, which did not proceed through the Parliament? (2) Why did the minister subsequently subvert the law by merging the Water and Rivers Commission with the Department of Environment without Parliament’s approval? (3) As the minister’s actions have demonstrated a clear failure to adhere to the lawful requirements of the act for which she is responsible, will the minister resign, or does she think that she and this Labor government are above the law? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
(2) Why did the minister subsequently subvert the law by merging the Water and Rivers Commission with the Department of Environment without Parliament’s approval? (3) As the minister’s actions have demonstrated a clear failure to adhere to the lawful requirements of the act for which she is responsible, will the minister resign, or does she think that she and this Labor government are above the law? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
(3) As the minister’s actions have demonstrated a clear failure to adhere to the lawful requirements of the act for which she is responsible, will the minister resign, or does she think that she and this Labor government are above the law? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
(1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
(1) Does the minister remember introducing the Machinery of Government (Water Resources) Amendment Bill into the Parliament to abolish the commission, which did not proceed through the Parliament? (2) Why did the minister subsequently subvert the law by merging the Water and Rivers Commission with the Department of Environment without Parliament’s approval? (3) As the minister’s actions have demonstrated a clear failure to adhere to the lawful requirements of the act for which she is responsible, will the minister resign, or does she think that she and this Labor government are above the law? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
(2) Why did the minister subsequently subvert the law by merging the Water and Rivers Commission with the Department of Environment without Parliament’s approval? (3) As the minister’s actions have demonstrated a clear failure to adhere to the lawful requirements of the act for which she is responsible, will the minister resign, or does she think that she and this Labor government are above the law? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
(3) As the minister’s actions have demonstrated a clear failure to adhere to the lawful requirements of the act for which she is responsible, will the minister resign, or does she think that she and this Labor government are above the law? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
(1)-(3) What a strange question. Yes, of course I remember that legislation. I also remember what members opposite said about water resource management charges. Talk about flip-flop. First they opposed them. Then when the National Water Initiative came in, they wanted them. However, when the government put out the irrigation review report and said that it was seriously thinking about the charges, they suddenly did not know where they were. I can remember that. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The machinery of government bill passed through this chamber and went to the other house, but then there was an election. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS : The member is entirely wrong in the second part of his question. If he reads the budget papers every year, he will see a division for the Water and Rivers Commission. Of course the Water and Rivers Commission still exists, because the legislation to repeal the commission has not gone through the Parliament. There has been no breaking of the law. It is administratively quite legitimate to create departments, as happened with the Department of Environment. The Department of Environment has replaced the previous Department of Environmental Protection. It also services the Water and Rivers Commission.
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.