❓ Hon Dee Margetts questions the Premier regarding the National Competition Policy (NCP) and its impact on Western Australia, particularly concerning the Productivity Commission's review and the Premier's communication with the Prime Minister. The Premier agrees to table a letter regarding retail trading hours and NCP.
AnsweredQoN 90Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the inquiry into the future of national competition policy and the National Competition Council. (1) Will the Leader of the House table the letter that the Premier sent to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 regarding the retention of NCP payments for Western Australia, and, if and when received, the Prime Minister’s letter in response? (2) Given that the Productivity Commission is focused on big business and investment, how can the Premier guarantee that the findings of the Productivity Commission’s review of national competition policy adequately reflect the real impacts of NCP that have been experienced by many primary, small business and community sectors in Western Australia? (3) Does the Premier agree with the findings of the Productivity Commission’s report - I have seen only the draft - which calls for NCP to go even further via a new round of legislative reviews targeting health care, freight, passenger transport, communications and natural resource management? (4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(1) Will the Leader of the House table the letter that the Premier sent to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 regarding the retention of NCP payments for Western Australia, and, if and when received, the Prime Minister’s letter in response? (2) Given that the Productivity Commission is focused on big business and investment, how can the Premier guarantee that the findings of the Productivity Commission’s review of national competition policy adequately reflect the real impacts of NCP that have been experienced by many primary, small business and community sectors in Western Australia? (3) Does the Premier agree with the findings of the Productivity Commission’s report - I have seen only the draft - which calls for NCP to go even further via a new round of legislative reviews targeting health care, freight, passenger transport, communications and natural resource management? (4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(2) Given that the Productivity Commission is focused on big business and investment, how can the Premier guarantee that the findings of the Productivity Commission’s review of national competition policy adequately reflect the real impacts of NCP that have been experienced by many primary, small business and community sectors in Western Australia? (3) Does the Premier agree with the findings of the Productivity Commission’s report - I have seen only the draft - which calls for NCP to go even further via a new round of legislative reviews targeting health care, freight, passenger transport, communications and natural resource management? (4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(3) Does the Premier agree with the findings of the Productivity Commission’s report - I have seen only the draft - which calls for NCP to go even further via a new round of legislative reviews targeting health care, freight, passenger transport, communications and natural resource management? (4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
[See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(4) Not applicable.
(1) Will the Leader of the House table the letter that the Premier sent to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 regarding the retention of NCP payments for Western Australia, and, if and when received, the Prime Minister’s letter in response? (2) Given that the Productivity Commission is focused on big business and investment, how can the Premier guarantee that the findings of the Productivity Commission’s review of national competition policy adequately reflect the real impacts of NCP that have been experienced by many primary, small business and community sectors in Western Australia? (3) Does the Premier agree with the findings of the Productivity Commission’s report - I have seen only the draft - which calls for NCP to go even further via a new round of legislative reviews targeting health care, freight, passenger transport, communications and natural resource management? (4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(2) Given that the Productivity Commission is focused on big business and investment, how can the Premier guarantee that the findings of the Productivity Commission’s review of national competition policy adequately reflect the real impacts of NCP that have been experienced by many primary, small business and community sectors in Western Australia? (3) Does the Premier agree with the findings of the Productivity Commission’s report - I have seen only the draft - which calls for NCP to go even further via a new round of legislative reviews targeting health care, freight, passenger transport, communications and natural resource management? (4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(3) Does the Premier agree with the findings of the Productivity Commission’s report - I have seen only the draft - which calls for NCP to go even further via a new round of legislative reviews targeting health care, freight, passenger transport, communications and natural resource management? (4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(4) If not, will the Premier now agree that wide consultation is urgently needed to mount the strongest possible case against radical reform of national competition policy to protect the real public interest for Western Australians? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
I thank Hon Dee Margetts for some notice of the question. (1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(1) As indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the letter sent by the Premier to the Prime Minister on 14 March 2005 was about retail trading hours and NCP. However, I am happy to table the letter for the information of the house. No response has yet been received from the Prime Minister. [See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
[See paper 238.] (2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(2) It is not the Premier’ responsibility to guarantee the findings of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry. (3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(3) As indicated in response to the member’s question - I keep having to pause, because on the written answer is “minister’s question”; Hon Dee Margetts has just been promoted! As I was saying, as indicated in response to the member’s question without notice on 5 April 2005, the final report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the impact of NCP was submitted to the federal Treasurer at the end of February 2005. The federal Treasurer has not released that report. (4) Not applicable.
(4) Not applicable.
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.