❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice scrutinizes the "Waving the Wand" weed management project, raising concerns about financial management, project completion, and asset ownership. The response provides some clarification but lacks detail in certain areas.
AnsweredQoN 1968Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the South West Catchment Council (SWCC) project ID 33063 called “Waving the Wand”, and designed to implement the West Arthur environmental weed strategy, and I ask -
(1) Has this project been completed, have all payments been made and has the project been finally audited?
(2) Have concerns been raised about the project’s completion or audit process?
(3) Was the project manager a West Arthur shire worker, and was she paid from project funds for working on the project whilst being concurrently paid by the West Arthur Shire?
(4) If so, was either source of payment reimbursed?
(5) Has the weed mapping on road reserves part of the project, apparently funded in July 2005 at $4,200, been completed?
(a) was it funded in advance of the work being completed;
(b) when was it completed, and why; and
(c) if not, why not?
(6) What was the total cost of chemicals for the project?
(7) What was the capital expenditure for the project, and what capital items were purchased?
(8) Where are those capital items now and who has ownership of them?
(9) Has the field day, funded by $2,000 of the project, occurred, and if so when?
(10) How much was spent on small weed equipment, and what was the breakdown of those purchases?
(11) Was a spray trailer purchased, and for how much?
(12) Was a shed purchased, and how much?
(13) Were the trailer or shed, if purchased, considered capital items, and if not why not?
(1) Has this project been completed, have all payments been made and has the project been finally audited?
(2) Have concerns been raised about the project’s completion or audit process?
(3) Was the project manager a West Arthur shire worker, and was she paid from project funds for working on the project whilst being concurrently paid by the West Arthur Shire?
(4) If so, was either source of payment reimbursed?
(5) Has the weed mapping on road reserves part of the project, apparently funded in July 2005 at $4,200, been completed?
(a) was it funded in advance of the work being completed;
(b) when was it completed, and why; and
(c) if not, why not?
(6) What was the total cost of chemicals for the project?
(7) What was the capital expenditure for the project, and what capital items were purchased?
(8) Where are those capital items now and who has ownership of them?
(9) Has the field day, funded by $2,000 of the project, occurred, and if so when?
(10) How much was spent on small weed equipment, and what was the breakdown of those purchases?
(11) Was a spray trailer purchased, and for how much?
(12) Was a shed purchased, and how much?
(13) Were the trailer or shed, if purchased, considered capital items, and if not why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
8 May 2007
Responded by
Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food
Response time
49 days
(b) when was it completed, and why; and (c) if not, why not?
(c) if not, why not?
The final project report includes an audited financial statement that acquits all payments made by the SNRMO to SWCC and by SWCC to the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. (2) No formal concerns have been raised about the project's completion or audit process. (3) The funding for the project was provided by SWCC to the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. The Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. utilised the human resource and payroll services of the Shire of West Arthur to assist with the employment of the project manager and funds were transferred to the Shire for these purposes. The day to day management of the project manager however, is understood to have been delegated by the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. to the West Arthur Land Conservation District Committee (LCDC). It is understood that the project manager together with another person was provided an additional payment via a contract arrangement with the West Arthur LCDC to undertake some weed mapping as part of the project. This payment has been reimbursed. (4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(2) No formal concerns have been raised about the project's completion or audit process. (3) The funding for the project was provided by SWCC to the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. The Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. utilised the human resource and payroll services of the Shire of West Arthur to assist with the employment of the project manager and funds were transferred to the Shire for these purposes. The day to day management of the project manager however, is understood to have been delegated by the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. to the West Arthur Land Conservation District Committee (LCDC). It is understood that the project manager together with another person was provided an additional payment via a contract arrangement with the West Arthur LCDC to undertake some weed mapping as part of the project. This payment has been reimbursed. (4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(3) The funding for the project was provided by SWCC to the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. The Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. utilised the human resource and payroll services of the Shire of West Arthur to assist with the employment of the project manager and funds were transferred to the Shire for these purposes. The day to day management of the project manager however, is understood to have been delegated by the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. to the West Arthur Land Conservation District Committee (LCDC). It is understood that the project manager together with another person was provided an additional payment via a contract arrangement with the West Arthur LCDC to undertake some weed mapping as part of the project. This payment has been reimbursed. (4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
It is understood that the project manager together with another person was provided an additional payment via a contract arrangement with the West Arthur LCDC to undertake some weed mapping as part of the project. This payment has been reimbursed. (4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(c) if not, why not?
The final project report includes an audited financial statement that acquits all payments made by the SNRMO to SWCC and by SWCC to the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. (2) No formal concerns have been raised about the project's completion or audit process. (3) The funding for the project was provided by SWCC to the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. The Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. utilised the human resource and payroll services of the Shire of West Arthur to assist with the employment of the project manager and funds were transferred to the Shire for these purposes. The day to day management of the project manager however, is understood to have been delegated by the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. to the West Arthur Land Conservation District Committee (LCDC). It is understood that the project manager together with another person was provided an additional payment via a contract arrangement with the West Arthur LCDC to undertake some weed mapping as part of the project. This payment has been reimbursed. (4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(2) No formal concerns have been raised about the project's completion or audit process. (3) The funding for the project was provided by SWCC to the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. The Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. utilised the human resource and payroll services of the Shire of West Arthur to assist with the employment of the project manager and funds were transferred to the Shire for these purposes. The day to day management of the project manager however, is understood to have been delegated by the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. to the West Arthur Land Conservation District Committee (LCDC). It is understood that the project manager together with another person was provided an additional payment via a contract arrangement with the West Arthur LCDC to undertake some weed mapping as part of the project. This payment has been reimbursed. (4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(3) The funding for the project was provided by SWCC to the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. The Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. utilised the human resource and payroll services of the Shire of West Arthur to assist with the employment of the project manager and funds were transferred to the Shire for these purposes. The day to day management of the project manager however, is understood to have been delegated by the Hillman Landcare Zone Inc. to the West Arthur Land Conservation District Committee (LCDC). It is understood that the project manager together with another person was provided an additional payment via a contract arrangement with the West Arthur LCDC to undertake some weed mapping as part of the project. This payment has been reimbursed. (4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
It is understood that the project manager together with another person was provided an additional payment via a contract arrangement with the West Arthur LCDC to undertake some weed mapping as part of the project. This payment has been reimbursed. (4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(4) Answered above. (5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(5) The final report for the project indicates this has been done. (a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(a) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(b) This could not be determined as it is not in the documentation. (c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(c) Not applicable. (6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(6) The total cost of chemicals for the project has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. The reported total operating cost of the project was $55,600. (7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(7) In the original audit statement received by SWCC in November 2005, no capital items were reported. Subsequent to this, an audit by the Shire of West Arthur determined that two capital items being a spray unit ($12,433.25) and a shed to house chemicals ($8,140.00) were purchased. (8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(8) The funding agreement for the project stipulates that capital items purchased with funding provided by the Department of Agriculture and Food belongs to the Department on behalf of the State of Western Australia. The Department of Agriculture and Food considers that it owns the spray unit and shed. The Shire of West Arthur currently has custody of the items. It is understood that the items are continuing to be used and extending the outcomes of the original project. The SNRMO and SWCC are currently resolving the matter of disposal. (9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(9) The project's final report states that a field day occurred. (10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(10) Project expenditure on small weed equipment has not been reported. Only major operating expenses are required to be reported in final project report's audited financial statement. (11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(11) Yes, $12,433.25 (12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(12) Yes, $8,140.00 (13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
(13) Under the funding agreement for the project, capital items are those with a purchase value greater than $5,000. Accordingly, the trailer and shed would both be considered capital items.
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.