❓ The exchange centres on the Premier's refusal to table the Oakajee Port agreement, with the opposition questioning his compliance with the Financial Management Act regarding commercial confidentiality and the Auditor General's review. The Premier deflects, questioning the opposition's motives.
AnsweredQoN 645Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I note the Premier’s walk-out this morning and his refusal to explain his actions, and I again ask — Why has the Premier not given written notice to both houses of Parliament and to the Auditor General, as required by section 82 of the Financial Management Act 2006, following his refusal on 6 and 7 May to table a copy of the Oakajee Port agreement? Is the Premier’s concern that the independent Auditor General could find, as he did yesterday with the Minister for Regional Development, that it is unreasonable for the Premier to claim that commercial confidentiality prevents him from disclosing any of this agreement? Mr C.J. BARNETT
AnswerView source ↗
Why is it that the about-to-leave former minister is so determined to hold back development in the mid-west? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Why has the Premier not given written notice to both houses of Parliament and to the Auditor General, as required by section 82 of the Financial Management Act 2006, following his refusal on 6 and 7 May to table a copy of the Oakajee Port agreement? Is the Premier’s concern that the independent Auditor General could find, as he did yesterday with the Minister for Regional Development, that it is unreasonable for the Premier to claim that commercial confidentiality prevents him from disclosing any of this agreement? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Why is it that the about-to-leave former minister is so determined to hold back development in the mid-west? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Why is it that the about-to-leave former minister is so determined to hold back development in the mid-west? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Why is it that the about-to-leave former minister is so determined to hold back development in the mid-west? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Why has the Premier not given written notice to both houses of Parliament and to the Auditor General, as required by section 82 of the Financial Management Act 2006, following his refusal on 6 and 7 May to table a copy of the Oakajee Port agreement? Is the Premier’s concern that the independent Auditor General could find, as he did yesterday with the Minister for Regional Development, that it is unreasonable for the Premier to claim that commercial confidentiality prevents him from disclosing any of this agreement? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Why is it that the about-to-leave former minister is so determined to hold back development in the mid-west? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: Why is it that the about-to-leave former minister is so determined to hold back development in the mid-west? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Why is it that the about-to-leave former minister is so determined to hold back development in the mid-west? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I’m so determined to call you to account—that’s my job. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Armadale has just asked a question and I would like to hear at least some of the answer. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : But I do not think he is trying, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : This is not an opportunity for the member for Armadale to challenge what I am saying. Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : I cannot understand why a member of this Parliament—about to leave and probably about to become long-term unemployed—would decide to do all that she can in her remaining days to destroy the opportunity for real economic development and real employment and investment in the mid-west. Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr A.J. Carpenter : You did it last year when you were opposing Gorgon; do you remember that? The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Willagee may have some insight into a lot of things in this place, but I ask him to stop interjecting, even if he does have a good memory. I formally call the member for Willagee for the first time. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : Section 82 of the Financial Management Act is titled “Minister to report decisions not to provide certain information about agencies”. The first point I make is that this is an agreement between the Premier and the Minister for Transport and a private proponent. This is not agency to agency; it is not about an agency to a service. That is the first point. Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr E.S. Ripper : That is precisely the reason for and point of that section. Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition can argue that point. Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Your people argued that point when the matter was before the house. Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : That is the first point that I made, and, if members opposite listened, there can be an argument about how that section is interpreted. The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The second point is that this is a commercial agreement that will be followed up and, essentially, bypassed by a former state agreement that will come to this house when we have negotiated the terms of the development in detail. That will come to this Parliament and go through both houses quite properly. I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
I pose a rhetorical question: what is it that is driving members opposite? Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Honesty, integrity, transparency and openness in government. Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, it is a little more than that. What commercial interests are the opposition supporting? What is their motive and whose interests are they seeking to serve? Whose interests are members opposite seeking to serve? I do not know. The release of that information would be to the direct commercial benefit and financial gain of some business interests. Is the opposition seeking to further those commercial and financial interests? Is the opposition trying to set up their case? I think there is little more to these questions than meets the eye. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier aware that the very reason this provision was included, and its matching provision in the Auditor General’s Act, was to test—this is to quote Hon George Cash from the upper house—government claims of commercial confidentiality, and that is the very reason these provisions have been included? The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : It is not a supplementary question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
The SPEAKER : Order! If the member for Armadale wants to ask a supplementary question, she will ask it in an acceptable manner, not by making a statement.
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.