❓ WA Minister Kim Chance expresses frustration with the federal government's delay in signing the National Action Plan on Salinity and Water Quality agreement, jeopardizing funding for WA's salinity management efforts despite WA's proactive investment.
AnsweredQoN 749Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
The West Australian of 18 March 2003 reported that the federal Government is yet to sign its $700 million national action plan on salinity. Will the minister please advise when the federal Government is likely to sign the national action plan? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
If only I knew. I thank the member for some notice of this question. Western Australia is a party to the national action plan on salinity and water quality, under which the Commonwealth has offered Western Australia up to $158 million over several years. The $700 million quoted is a national figure, although to be realistic, it should be quoted as $1.4 billion because the Commonwealth’s contribution is $700 million and the States’ contribution is also nominally $700 million. On 3 November 2002 the Prime Minister wrote to the Premier suggesting that Western Australia and the Commonwealth should conclude a bilateral agreement as quickly as possible. The Premier replied on 26 November 2002 enclosing a copy of the bilateral agreement signed by the Premier on behalf of Western Australia and seeking an assurance that the national action plan funding would be forthcoming before 31 December 2002. Despite repeated follow-ups from the Minister for the Environment and me and our agencies, the Commonwealth has not yet responded to the Premier’s letter nor has it indicated if or when the Prime Minister will sign the agreement. The State Government recently extended the funding that it is providing to the regions, without any commonwealth contribution, until June. Western Australia was the first State to invest seriously in solving salinity problems and we are the last to get any commonwealth assistance. At the moment the State, the regions and the community are meeting the challenge without any commonwealth help. I will add to that answer a little by clearly stating that the State has gone out on a limb to provide additional funding. We have had no guarantees whatsoever that the Commonwealth will match this money - none whatsoever - and it could be that every dollar we are spending now is money that will be lost in the matching arrangements. Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : If only I knew. I thank the member for some notice of this question. Western Australia is a party to the national action plan on salinity and water quality, under which the Commonwealth has offered Western Australia up to $158 million over several years. The $700 million quoted is a national figure, although to be realistic, it should be quoted as $1.4 billion because the Commonwealth’s contribution is $700 million and the States’ contribution is also nominally $700 million. On 3 November 2002 the Prime Minister wrote to the Premier suggesting that Western Australia and the Commonwealth should conclude a bilateral agreement as quickly as possible. The Premier replied on 26 November 2002 enclosing a copy of the bilateral agreement signed by the Premier on behalf of Western Australia and seeking an assurance that the national action plan funding would be forthcoming before 31 December 2002. Despite repeated follow-ups from the Minister for the Environment and me and our agencies, the Commonwealth has not yet responded to the Premier’s letter nor has it indicated if or when the Prime Minister will sign the agreement. The State Government recently extended the funding that it is providing to the regions, without any commonwealth contribution, until June. Western Australia was the first State to invest seriously in solving salinity problems and we are the last to get any commonwealth assistance. At the moment the State, the regions and the community are meeting the challenge without any commonwealth help. I will add to that answer a little by clearly stating that the State has gone out on a limb to provide additional funding. We have had no guarantees whatsoever that the Commonwealth will match this money - none whatsoever - and it could be that every dollar we are spending now is money that will be lost in the matching arrangements. Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
If only I knew. I thank the member for some notice of this question. Western Australia is a party to the national action plan on salinity and water quality, under which the Commonwealth has offered Western Australia up to $158 million over several years. The $700 million quoted is a national figure, although to be realistic, it should be quoted as $1.4 billion because the Commonwealth’s contribution is $700 million and the States’ contribution is also nominally $700 million. On 3 November 2002 the Prime Minister wrote to the Premier suggesting that Western Australia and the Commonwealth should conclude a bilateral agreement as quickly as possible. The Premier replied on 26 November 2002 enclosing a copy of the bilateral agreement signed by the Premier on behalf of Western Australia and seeking an assurance that the national action plan funding would be forthcoming before 31 December 2002. Despite repeated follow-ups from the Minister for the Environment and me and our agencies, the Commonwealth has not yet responded to the Premier’s letter nor has it indicated if or when the Prime Minister will sign the agreement. The State Government recently extended the funding that it is providing to the regions, without any commonwealth contribution, until June. Western Australia was the first State to invest seriously in solving salinity problems and we are the last to get any commonwealth assistance. At the moment the State, the regions and the community are meeting the challenge without any commonwealth help. I will add to that answer a little by clearly stating that the State has gone out on a limb to provide additional funding. We have had no guarantees whatsoever that the Commonwealth will match this money - none whatsoever - and it could be that every dollar we are spending now is money that will be lost in the matching arrangements. Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
I will add to that answer a little by clearly stating that the State has gone out on a limb to provide additional funding. We have had no guarantees whatsoever that the Commonwealth will match this money - none whatsoever - and it could be that every dollar we are spending now is money that will be lost in the matching arrangements. Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : If only I knew. I thank the member for some notice of this question. Western Australia is a party to the national action plan on salinity and water quality, under which the Commonwealth has offered Western Australia up to $158 million over several years. The $700 million quoted is a national figure, although to be realistic, it should be quoted as $1.4 billion because the Commonwealth’s contribution is $700 million and the States’ contribution is also nominally $700 million. On 3 November 2002 the Prime Minister wrote to the Premier suggesting that Western Australia and the Commonwealth should conclude a bilateral agreement as quickly as possible. The Premier replied on 26 November 2002 enclosing a copy of the bilateral agreement signed by the Premier on behalf of Western Australia and seeking an assurance that the national action plan funding would be forthcoming before 31 December 2002. Despite repeated follow-ups from the Minister for the Environment and me and our agencies, the Commonwealth has not yet responded to the Premier’s letter nor has it indicated if or when the Prime Minister will sign the agreement. The State Government recently extended the funding that it is providing to the regions, without any commonwealth contribution, until June. Western Australia was the first State to invest seriously in solving salinity problems and we are the last to get any commonwealth assistance. At the moment the State, the regions and the community are meeting the challenge without any commonwealth help. I will add to that answer a little by clearly stating that the State has gone out on a limb to provide additional funding. We have had no guarantees whatsoever that the Commonwealth will match this money - none whatsoever - and it could be that every dollar we are spending now is money that will be lost in the matching arrangements. Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
If only I knew. I thank the member for some notice of this question. Western Australia is a party to the national action plan on salinity and water quality, under which the Commonwealth has offered Western Australia up to $158 million over several years. The $700 million quoted is a national figure, although to be realistic, it should be quoted as $1.4 billion because the Commonwealth’s contribution is $700 million and the States’ contribution is also nominally $700 million. On 3 November 2002 the Prime Minister wrote to the Premier suggesting that Western Australia and the Commonwealth should conclude a bilateral agreement as quickly as possible. The Premier replied on 26 November 2002 enclosing a copy of the bilateral agreement signed by the Premier on behalf of Western Australia and seeking an assurance that the national action plan funding would be forthcoming before 31 December 2002. Despite repeated follow-ups from the Minister for the Environment and me and our agencies, the Commonwealth has not yet responded to the Premier’s letter nor has it indicated if or when the Prime Minister will sign the agreement. The State Government recently extended the funding that it is providing to the regions, without any commonwealth contribution, until June. Western Australia was the first State to invest seriously in solving salinity problems and we are the last to get any commonwealth assistance. At the moment the State, the regions and the community are meeting the challenge without any commonwealth help. I will add to that answer a little by clearly stating that the State has gone out on a limb to provide additional funding. We have had no guarantees whatsoever that the Commonwealth will match this money - none whatsoever - and it could be that every dollar we are spending now is money that will be lost in the matching arrangements. Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
I will add to that answer a little by clearly stating that the State has gone out on a limb to provide additional funding. We have had no guarantees whatsoever that the Commonwealth will match this money - none whatsoever - and it could be that every dollar we are spending now is money that will be lost in the matching arrangements. Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
Hon Norman Moore: And the money spent by the previous Government. Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Indeed, and I am happy to acknowledge that. “Pre-emptive” is a negative term, but the priority that the coalition Government gave to salinity funding in this State is recognised by us and has been supported by us. It is not recognised by the Commonwealth, unfortunately, and that has been the difficulty. What concerns me most of all is that given the date of the Premier’s letter to the Prime Minister of 26 November, not only have we not received an affirmative response from the Prime Minister, but also we have not received any response at all. It is not as though there is a problem with the position that we have put to the Commonwealth. If there were a problem, we would expect the Commonwealth to have come back to us within a week and said that it does not like what we have put in our bilateral agreement. Clearly, the Commonwealth does not mind what we have put into the bilateral agreement; it simply does not want to sign it. That is causing considerable problems not only for us as a Government - we are embarrassed by it - but also for those people who are waiting for funds in order to get on with salinity work.
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.