A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding the finalisation and tabling of a risk analysis report by Clifton Coney Stevens (WA) Pty Ltd, and the omission of annexures. The parliamentary secretary confirms the report is considered final and the annexures will be tabled the following week.

AnsweredQoN 950Legislative Council
Asked
15 May 2003
Portfolio
Planning and Infrastructure

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the parliamentary secretary’s answer to question on notice 405, in which he tabled the Clifton Coney Stevens (WA) Pty Ltd draft risk analysis - tabled paper No 925 of 2003. (1) Has a final report now been completed? If so, will the parliamentary secretary table it? If not, why will he not table it? (2) When the parliamentary secretary tabled paper No 925 of 2003, he omitted to table the annexures referred to in the risk analysis. What was the reason for omitting the annexures, and will he now table them? If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answer provided to me by the minister is as follows - (1) The Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003 has not changed and can be considered the final report. Given the number of reports used in the preparation of a master plan, this is not unusual. A number of reports used in the preparation of the master plan for the Kenwick deviation are still in draft form. (2) The documents referred to in the question are five discrete, specific reports prepared by other consultants and they did not form part of the Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003. It was not possible to copy and prepare the five reports for tabling in the time frame provided. The reports will be tabled next week.
(1) Has a final report now been completed? If so, will the parliamentary secretary table it? If not, why will he not table it? (2) When the parliamentary secretary tabled paper No 925 of 2003, he omitted to table the annexures referred to in the risk analysis. What was the reason for omitting the annexures, and will he now table them? If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answer provided to me by the minister is as follows - (1) The Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003 has not changed and can be considered the final report. Given the number of reports used in the preparation of a master plan, this is not unusual. A number of reports used in the preparation of the master plan for the Kenwick deviation are still in draft form. (2) The documents referred to in the question are five discrete, specific reports prepared by other consultants and they did not form part of the Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003. It was not possible to copy and prepare the five reports for tabling in the time frame provided. The reports will be tabled next week.
(2) When the parliamentary secretary tabled paper No 925 of 2003, he omitted to table the annexures referred to in the risk analysis. What was the reason for omitting the annexures, and will he now table them? If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answer provided to me by the minister is as follows - (1) The Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003 has not changed and can be considered the final report. Given the number of reports used in the preparation of a master plan, this is not unusual. A number of reports used in the preparation of the master plan for the Kenwick deviation are still in draft form. (2) The documents referred to in the question are five discrete, specific reports prepared by other consultants and they did not form part of the Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003. It was not possible to copy and prepare the five reports for tabling in the time frame provided. The reports will be tabled next week.
Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answer provided to me by the minister is as follows - (1) The Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003 has not changed and can be considered the final report. Given the number of reports used in the preparation of a master plan, this is not unusual. A number of reports used in the preparation of the master plan for the Kenwick deviation are still in draft form. (2) The documents referred to in the question are five discrete, specific reports prepared by other consultants and they did not form part of the Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003. It was not possible to copy and prepare the five reports for tabling in the time frame provided. The reports will be tabled next week.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answer provided to me by the minister is as follows - (1) The Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003 has not changed and can be considered the final report. Given the number of reports used in the preparation of a master plan, this is not unusual. A number of reports used in the preparation of the master plan for the Kenwick deviation are still in draft form. (2) The documents referred to in the question are five discrete, specific reports prepared by other consultants and they did not form part of the Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003. It was not possible to copy and prepare the five reports for tabling in the time frame provided. The reports will be tabled next week.
(1) The Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003 has not changed and can be considered the final report. Given the number of reports used in the preparation of a master plan, this is not unusual. A number of reports used in the preparation of the master plan for the Kenwick deviation are still in draft form. (2) The documents referred to in the question are five discrete, specific reports prepared by other consultants and they did not form part of the Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003. It was not possible to copy and prepare the five reports for tabling in the time frame provided. The reports will be tabled next week.
(2) The documents referred to in the question are five discrete, specific reports prepared by other consultants and they did not form part of the Clifton Coney Stevens report tabled on 3 April 2003. It was not possible to copy and prepare the five reports for tabling in the time frame provided. The reports will be tabled next week.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more