❓ Hon Christine Sharp asks the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries about timber contracts, probity audits, timber allocation, and export guarantees. The Minister responds critically, deeming her previous speech 'disgraceful' but states most questions were already answered, with the probity report sent to her.
AnsweredQoN 381Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Further to my remarks on 13 May on the estimates of review and expenditure debate, I ask the minister - (1) (a) Does the minister intend to make a ministerial statement to the House that fully outlines the costs and benefits to this State of providing an additional investment security guarantee in conjunction with long-term timber contracts; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(1) (a) Does the minister intend to make a ministerial statement to the House that fully outlines the costs and benefits to this State of providing an additional investment security guarantee in conjunction with long-term timber contracts; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so?
Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so?
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(1) (a) Does the minister intend to make a ministerial statement to the House that fully outlines the costs and benefits to this State of providing an additional investment security guarantee in conjunction with long-term timber contracts; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(2) (a) Does the minister intend to table the full probity audit of the request for proposals process; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? (3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(3) (a) Will the minister provide details to the House of how he intends to ensure an allocation of feature-grade timber to fine furniture makers and craft wood licences for fine wood crafts people; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: Order! I think a 10-part question in questions without notice is beyond reason in the amount of time it will take up. It may be inappropriate in terms of expectations of the minister. I will let the member finish but I quite understand if the minister answers only one question of the four or three parts of the 10. I do not think it is reasonable to take up the remaining 10 minutes of question time. Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so?
Hon CHRISTINE SHARP: Thank you, Mr President. I repeat that I put these questions to the minister on 13 May. (4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(4) (a) Will the minister provide a detailed guarantee that no native timber will be exported for value adding interstate or overseas or be allowed to be hoarded for future use; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so? The PRESIDENT: I am looking for a concise answer from the minister. Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
(c) if yes, when does the minister intend to do so?
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
It will be more concise than the question. I hold the honourable member in the highest regard. I felt it necessary to say that because of what I am about to say. Although I hold the member in the highest regard, the speech she referred to was probably the worst I have ever heard in this Chamber. It was incoherent, libellous and inaccurate. I thought it was a disgraceful speech. It will be treated in exactly the way that the speech deserves. However, in direct answer to the question, I submit that all except one part of those questions are fully answered already. The stage B probity report has been posted to the honourable member. I think that adequately covers the issues raised.
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.