Mr McGowan questions the government's potential equity partnership in the planned convention centre, focusing on liability and the shift from a previously private model. Mr Court responds, denying financial risk and liability, highlighting the eventual return of ownership to the State.

AnsweredQoN 82Legislative Assembly
Asked
5 September 2000
Member
Portfolio
Premier

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the planned convention and exhibition centre. (1) Who first proposed that the Government take an equity partnership in the convention centre project? (2) Why is the Government now considering taking equity in the project in the light of the fact that it formerly indicated that it would be a totally privately run and operated facility? (3) What potential liability for the State would be involved with an equity partnership? (4) Is the project’s finance at risk without government equity? Mr COURT

AnswerView source ↗

(1)-(4) The answer to the last part of the question is no. There would be no liability in the arrangement that is being negotiated. As the member knows, after a period, the ownership of the entire convention centre comes back to the State.
(1) Who first proposed that the Government take an equity partnership in the convention centre project? (2) Why is the Government now considering taking equity in the project in the light of the fact that it formerly indicated that it would be a totally privately run and operated facility? (3) What potential liability for the State would be involved with an equity partnership? (4) Is the project’s finance at risk without government equity? Mr COURT replied: (1)-(4) The answer to the last part of the question is no. There would be no liability in the arrangement that is being negotiated. As the member knows, after a period, the ownership of the entire convention centre comes back to the State.
(2) Why is the Government now considering taking equity in the project in the light of the fact that it formerly indicated that it would be a totally privately run and operated facility? (3) What potential liability for the State would be involved with an equity partnership? (4) Is the project’s finance at risk without government equity? Mr COURT replied: (1)-(4) The answer to the last part of the question is no. There would be no liability in the arrangement that is being negotiated. As the member knows, after a period, the ownership of the entire convention centre comes back to the State.
(3) What potential liability for the State would be involved with an equity partnership? (4) Is the project’s finance at risk without government equity? Mr COURT replied: (1)-(4) The answer to the last part of the question is no. There would be no liability in the arrangement that is being negotiated. As the member knows, after a period, the ownership of the entire convention centre comes back to the State.
(4) Is the project’s finance at risk without government equity? Mr COURT replied: (1)-(4) The answer to the last part of the question is no. There would be no liability in the arrangement that is being negotiated. As the member knows, after a period, the ownership of the entire convention centre comes back to the State.
Mr COURT replied: (1)-(4) The answer to the last part of the question is no. There would be no liability in the arrangement that is being negotiated. As the member knows, after a period, the ownership of the entire convention centre comes back to the State.
(1)-(4) The answer to the last part of the question is no. There would be no liability in the arrangement that is being negotiated. As the member knows, after a period, the ownership of the entire convention centre comes back to the State.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more