❓ Ms. Sanderson questions the Premier on the urgency of the Mineralogy Pty. Ltd. Agreement Amendment Bill 2020, addressing Clive Palmer's damages claim. The Premier defends the bill as crucial to protect Western Australians from a potential $30 billion payout.
AnsweredQoN 527Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
IRON ORE PROCESSING
(MINERALOGY PTY. LTD.) AGREEMENT AMENDMENT BILL 2020
527. Ms A. SANDERSON to the Premier:
I refer to the legislation
introduced into this house and second read yesterday by the Attorney General
that seeks to deal with the damages claim
submitted by Clive Palmer, Mineralogy, and International Minerals. Can the
Premier outline to the house why the
Parliament needs to debate and pass this legislation urgently and what the
consequences will be for Western Australians should this legislation not
pass the Parliament?
(MINERALOGY PTY. LTD.) AGREEMENT AMENDMENT BILL 2020
527. Ms A. SANDERSON to the Premier:
I refer to the legislation
introduced into this house and second read yesterday by the Attorney General
that seeks to deal with the damages claim
submitted by Clive Palmer, Mineralogy, and International Minerals. Can the
Premier outline to the house why the
Parliament needs to debate and pass this legislation urgently and what the
consequences will be for Western Australians should this legislation not
pass the Parliament?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question.
The Attorney General has outlined the reason we are taking this decisive action
to protect Western Australians. We would like to see these laws pass through
this house today and the upper house tomorrow. The Attorney General has
explained that the issue goes back to 2012 and 2014, with decisions made by
former Premier Colin Barnett. Mr Barnett made the right decisions. We support
the course of action that he took. Mr Palmer's proposals were flawed
and without appropriate detail. Mr Palmer had plans to sell the project to
various Chinese entities, but that was not the principal decision. The
principal decision made by Mr Barnett, as I understand it, was that the
proposals themselves were flawed. Mr Palmer was not happy with Mr Barnett's
decisions. He then, under the state agreement, sought arbitration. This has
never been done before in the history of state agreements. Mr Palmer has broken
new ground by doing this. Ordinarily, these matters are worked through between
the minister and the proponent—not via an arbitration process. Never
before have damages been sought under the
arbitration process. We have around 70 state agreements in Western Australia
and this has never happened before.
The position taken by Mr Palmer is that he is seeking a payment of around $30 billion
from Western Australian taxpayers, plus further unspecified damages for
breaches he claims. It could be well in excess of $30 billion.
That would be $12 000 dollars out of
the pocket of every single man, woman and child in this state. We have no
choice but to take the course of action we are taking to protect Western Australians.
Imagine the arbitrator making a ruling against our state in the amount of $30 billion?
Everyone in this chamber would be saying, ''Why didn't you take
action? Why didn't you legislate when you had the chance to?''
That is what we are doing and we cannot afford
to delay. Mr Palmer employs legions of lawyers. Who knows what he will do? We
need to pass these laws now. We are not going to risk selling out Western
Australia to someone like Clive Palmer. The Parliament and all political
parties need to work together on this matter. The bill is unprecedented, but so
are the circumstances and so is Mr Palmer's behaviour in this matter. I
have spoken to the mining industry. I saw this morning that Mr Paul Everingham
from the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia has endorsed our
action. I am thankful for that step by Mr Paul Everingham.
I did not become Premier to be soft. You have to do difficult
things. You have to be prepared to take difficult steps. You have to do things
that solve problems on behalf of the 2.6 million Western Australians who depend
upon the state government. That is what we are doing. We are going to defend
this state in the interests of the people and the children and future
generations of Western Australians. We will not give in to one man who is
seeking to take $30 billion from the citizens of this state—to take it
out of their pockets—and if he is successful, force us to take dramatic
steps like closing hospitals and schools, sacking masses of people, increasing
levies and taxes across the state, and seeking bailouts from the commonwealth.
That is the sort of thing that would be required if Mr Palmer were successful.
What makes this immeasurably worse is what the Attorney General just revealed a
moment ago—the letter from Mineralogy signed by Mr Palmer's
in-house lawyer. I want to quote clause 5 of this letter, which was sent on 2 August,
less than a couple of weeks ago, so all members fully understand what this is
about —
If the State can agree for the
arbitration hearing being held in Canberra, Mineralogy could be agreeable to
withdraw its High Court challenge on that basis with each party to pay their
own costs.
Mr Palmer is saying that he would stop his High Court action
on the border if we were prepared to move his arbitration against the state to
Canberra. In other words, Mr Palmer's High Court border challenge is a disgusting
sham; it is a disgusting subterfuge. The only reason he wanted to bring the
border down was so that he could take this state for $30 billion. That is the
only reason he pursued that action. We have seen all those mealy-mouthed
advertisements in which he claims it was some matter of personal freedom or
something for him. No, it was not. We have the proof. He just wanted to bring
the border down and risk the lives of Western Australians so he could get money
out of us. That is all it was about.
I say to the state opposition: Support us. Let us get
legislation through both houses today and tomorrow. Let us defend Western Australians.
Do not support Clive Palmer.
The Attorney General has outlined the reason we are taking this decisive action
to protect Western Australians. We would like to see these laws pass through
this house today and the upper house tomorrow. The Attorney General has
explained that the issue goes back to 2012 and 2014, with decisions made by
former Premier Colin Barnett. Mr Barnett made the right decisions. We support
the course of action that he took. Mr Palmer's proposals were flawed
and without appropriate detail. Mr Palmer had plans to sell the project to
various Chinese entities, but that was not the principal decision. The
principal decision made by Mr Barnett, as I understand it, was that the
proposals themselves were flawed. Mr Palmer was not happy with Mr Barnett's
decisions. He then, under the state agreement, sought arbitration. This has
never been done before in the history of state agreements. Mr Palmer has broken
new ground by doing this. Ordinarily, these matters are worked through between
the minister and the proponent—not via an arbitration process. Never
before have damages been sought under the
arbitration process. We have around 70 state agreements in Western Australia
and this has never happened before.
The position taken by Mr Palmer is that he is seeking a payment of around $30 billion
from Western Australian taxpayers, plus further unspecified damages for
breaches he claims. It could be well in excess of $30 billion.
That would be $12 000 dollars out of
the pocket of every single man, woman and child in this state. We have no
choice but to take the course of action we are taking to protect Western Australians.
Imagine the arbitrator making a ruling against our state in the amount of $30 billion?
Everyone in this chamber would be saying, ''Why didn't you take
action? Why didn't you legislate when you had the chance to?''
That is what we are doing and we cannot afford
to delay. Mr Palmer employs legions of lawyers. Who knows what he will do? We
need to pass these laws now. We are not going to risk selling out Western
Australia to someone like Clive Palmer. The Parliament and all political
parties need to work together on this matter. The bill is unprecedented, but so
are the circumstances and so is Mr Palmer's behaviour in this matter. I
have spoken to the mining industry. I saw this morning that Mr Paul Everingham
from the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia has endorsed our
action. I am thankful for that step by Mr Paul Everingham.
I did not become Premier to be soft. You have to do difficult
things. You have to be prepared to take difficult steps. You have to do things
that solve problems on behalf of the 2.6 million Western Australians who depend
upon the state government. That is what we are doing. We are going to defend
this state in the interests of the people and the children and future
generations of Western Australians. We will not give in to one man who is
seeking to take $30 billion from the citizens of this state—to take it
out of their pockets—and if he is successful, force us to take dramatic
steps like closing hospitals and schools, sacking masses of people, increasing
levies and taxes across the state, and seeking bailouts from the commonwealth.
That is the sort of thing that would be required if Mr Palmer were successful.
What makes this immeasurably worse is what the Attorney General just revealed a
moment ago—the letter from Mineralogy signed by Mr Palmer's
in-house lawyer. I want to quote clause 5 of this letter, which was sent on 2 August,
less than a couple of weeks ago, so all members fully understand what this is
about —
If the State can agree for the
arbitration hearing being held in Canberra, Mineralogy could be agreeable to
withdraw its High Court challenge on that basis with each party to pay their
own costs.
Mr Palmer is saying that he would stop his High Court action
on the border if we were prepared to move his arbitration against the state to
Canberra. In other words, Mr Palmer's High Court border challenge is a disgusting
sham; it is a disgusting subterfuge. The only reason he wanted to bring the
border down was so that he could take this state for $30 billion. That is the
only reason he pursued that action. We have seen all those mealy-mouthed
advertisements in which he claims it was some matter of personal freedom or
something for him. No, it was not. We have the proof. He just wanted to bring
the border down and risk the lives of Western Australians so he could get money
out of us. That is all it was about.
I say to the state opposition: Support us. Let us get
legislation through both houses today and tomorrow. Let us defend Western Australians.
Do not support Clive Palmer.
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.