❓ Hon Peter Foss questions Hon Tom Stephens about the Premier's threat to review grants to local governments subscribing to the Country Alliance. The Minister avoids answering, leading to points of order.
AnsweredQoN 1130Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
GRANTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
I refer to the Premier’s statement that he will review the State Government’s grants to local governments if they subscribe to the Country Alliance’s funds appeal. I ask the minister responsible for local government - (1) Does the minister intend to change the method by which grants are made to local governments; and, if so, how? (2) Will the minister give any instruction to the grants body to take such a subscription into account? (3) Is the minister aware of his ministerial oath not to act with prejudice or favour; and, if so, how does the minister reconcile this with taking action pursuant to the Premier’s threat? (4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS
I refer to the Premier’s statement that he will review the State Government’s grants to local governments if they subscribe to the Country Alliance’s funds appeal. I ask the minister responsible for local government - (1) Does the minister intend to change the method by which grants are made to local governments; and, if so, how? (2) Will the minister give any instruction to the grants body to take such a subscription into account? (3) Is the minister aware of his ministerial oath not to act with prejudice or favour; and, if so, how does the minister reconcile this with taking action pursuant to the Premier’s threat? (4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(1) Does the minister intend to change the method by which grants are made to local governments; and, if so, how? (2) Will the minister give any instruction to the grants body to take such a subscription into account? (3) Is the minister aware of his ministerial oath not to act with prejudice or favour; and, if so, how does the minister reconcile this with taking action pursuant to the Premier’s threat? (4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(2) Will the minister give any instruction to the grants body to take such a subscription into account? (3) Is the minister aware of his ministerial oath not to act with prejudice or favour; and, if so, how does the minister reconcile this with taking action pursuant to the Premier’s threat? (4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(3) Is the minister aware of his ministerial oath not to act with prejudice or favour; and, if so, how does the minister reconcile this with taking action pursuant to the Premier’s threat? (4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(1) Does the minister intend to change the method by which grants are made to local governments; and, if so, how? (2) Will the minister give any instruction to the grants body to take such a subscription into account? (3) Is the minister aware of his ministerial oath not to act with prejudice or favour; and, if so, how does the minister reconcile this with taking action pursuant to the Premier’s threat? (4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(2) Will the minister give any instruction to the grants body to take such a subscription into account? (3) Is the minister aware of his ministerial oath not to act with prejudice or favour; and, if so, how does the minister reconcile this with taking action pursuant to the Premier’s threat? (4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(3) Is the minister aware of his ministerial oath not to act with prejudice or favour; and, if so, how does the minister reconcile this with taking action pursuant to the Premier’s threat? (4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(4) How does the minister reconcile the punishment of a third tier of government by the second tier of government with the views the minister has just expressed on this relationship? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
(1)-(4) It is a great tragedy that the former Attorney General has got his facts so twisted and confused. This self-proclaimed best QC on offer in the Liberal Party, who is already in the pay of the public purse, is equipped with the resources to present whatever argument the Liberal Party wants to present to the Supreme Court. Effectively, the Opposition is trying to double dip into ratepayers’ funds to fund Hon Peter Foss when he is already on the payroll of the public of Western Australia and considers himself to be the best QC in the State. The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister will address the Chair and, hopefully, the question. Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
Hon TOM STEPHENS: If this egotistical QC, who is convinced of his own self-worth and merit, is so convinced of his capacity to present any argument, let him go to the Supreme Court and present any argument that he likes. He is already being paid by the taxpayers; he does not need to be paid by the ratepayers. Point of Order Hon PETER FOSS: I know that the minister is not required to answer my question, and it is clear that he is determined not to do so, but he is obliged to be relevant. The question I asked was whether he thought the punishment imposed on the third tier of government by the second tier of government was appropriate to that relationship in view of what he had said. I will be grateful if he will answer the question. The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed
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.