❓ Question regarding transparency of the potential sale of the South Fremantle Power Station. The Minister vehemently denies interference and accuses the questioner of suggesting corruption, citing past government dealings as examples of non-transparent behaviour.
AnsweredQoN 90Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
SOUTH FREMANTLE POWER STATION — SALE
90. Dr D.J. HONEY to the Minister for Energy:
I have a supplementary question.
Surely, given the Premier's commitment to gold-standard transparency,
the public of Western Australia deserves to know about the sale of this asset
and, in particular, any commitments made on behalf of the public of Western Australia.
90. Dr D.J. HONEY to the Minister for Energy:
I have a supplementary question.
Surely, given the Premier's commitment to gold-standard transparency,
the public of Western Australia deserves to know about the sale of this asset
and, in particular, any commitments made on behalf of the public of Western Australia.
AnswerView source ↗
What I say to the people of this
state is that if the sale ever happens, the entire issues will be made public.
There is no sale. The asset has not been
disposed of. The process, properly, is being done by Synergy. Let me make it
clear : Synergy does commercial transactions every day of the week. It is
a commercial business. It does billion-dollar transactions.
The idea that I would interfere in those commercial decisions is outrageous!
You are asking for corrupt behaviour by me. I will not join you in
supporting corrupt behaviour. You cannot ask a politician to interfere in a commercial
decision.
Several members interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Members!
Members of the opposition!
Mr W.J. JOHNSTON : What sort of government was the last
lot? What did they do? Did they call people in and say, ''Don't do that; do this. Oh no, that's the
wrong deal; this is the best deal''? Let us go through it. Let us
remember what happened when your government was in power—the
Muja AB deal. An amount of $82 000 was paid by a company based in Geelong for a 50 per cent share in that agreement. Do
members know how much was contributed by the people of this state? It
was $320 million. Think about that, member. This is what you think is a good
deal—$82 000 for 50 per cent.
Dr D.J. Honey interjected.
Mr W.J. JOHNSTON : No, it was
not.
Dr D.J. Honey interjected.
Mr W.J. JOHNSTON : No, that is
not true. Day after day the member's government came in here and denied
the truth. It took us months and months to find out what happened. There was no
transparency, just dishonesty. It was $82 000 for 50 per cent; $320 million for
50 per cent. That is the sort of behaviour. Then there was the deal for a project
in Port Hedland when the government of Western Australia took a 27-year
obligation from a gas-fired power station but did not buy any electricity. It
did not buy any electricity! It took a 27-year obligation on a power station that stopped renewable energy getting into
the grid, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, with direct political interference. I am not corrupt like that. I insist—I directed Synergy
on this—that Synergy do this as a commercial decision, and when it
completes its commercial transaction, it can tell me what is happening.
state is that if the sale ever happens, the entire issues will be made public.
There is no sale. The asset has not been
disposed of. The process, properly, is being done by Synergy. Let me make it
clear : Synergy does commercial transactions every day of the week. It is
a commercial business. It does billion-dollar transactions.
The idea that I would interfere in those commercial decisions is outrageous!
You are asking for corrupt behaviour by me. I will not join you in
supporting corrupt behaviour. You cannot ask a politician to interfere in a commercial
decision.
Several members interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Members!
Members of the opposition!
Mr W.J. JOHNSTON : What sort of government was the last
lot? What did they do? Did they call people in and say, ''Don't do that; do this. Oh no, that's the
wrong deal; this is the best deal''? Let us go through it. Let us
remember what happened when your government was in power—the
Muja AB deal. An amount of $82 000 was paid by a company based in Geelong for a 50 per cent share in that agreement. Do
members know how much was contributed by the people of this state? It
was $320 million. Think about that, member. This is what you think is a good
deal—$82 000 for 50 per cent.
Dr D.J. Honey interjected.
Mr W.J. JOHNSTON : No, it was
not.
Dr D.J. Honey interjected.
Mr W.J. JOHNSTON : No, that is
not true. Day after day the member's government came in here and denied
the truth. It took us months and months to find out what happened. There was no
transparency, just dishonesty. It was $82 000 for 50 per cent; $320 million for
50 per cent. That is the sort of behaviour. Then there was the deal for a project
in Port Hedland when the government of Western Australia took a 27-year
obligation from a gas-fired power station but did not buy any electricity. It
did not buy any electricity! It took a 27-year obligation on a power station that stopped renewable energy getting into
the grid, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, with direct political interference. I am not corrupt like that. I insist—I directed Synergy
on this—that Synergy do this as a commercial decision, and when it
completes its commercial transaction, it can tell me what is happening.
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.