Hon. Christine Sharp requests the tabling of documents related to the Forest Products Commission, including a probity audit, a production contract, and selection criteria. Hon. Kim Chance agrees to table the contract and criteria, but expresses uncertainty about the probity audit due to potential confidentiality issues.

AnsweredQoN 110Legislative Council
Asked
11 March 2004

QuestionView source ↗

Can the minister please table before the end of this week the following - (a) the report of the probity audit on the request for proposals process; (b) the new production contract between the Forest Products Commission and Nannup Timber Processing Pty Ltd; and (c) the criteria by which the successful timber mills determined by the request for proposals process were chosen? Hon KIM CHANCE

AnswerView source ↗

Yes, I believe I can table the production contract with NTP; it should be a public document. Certainly, there is absolutely no difficulty in tabling the criteria by which mills were chosen in the request for proposals process. I imagine there is a report of the probity auditor because the request for proposals process was overseen by a probity auditor, and no doubt the probity auditor would have reported to the General Manager of the Forest Products Commission. I undertake to investigate whether the probity auditor’s report, if it exists, is in a form that can be tabled. I believe it should be, but it is possible that the probity auditor’s report, because of the nature of the contract overseeing process it had, may well contain confidential material that will prevent its being tabled. I am keen to table it if I can. There may be a question mark about the first report, but tabling the other two documents should not be a problem. Given that today is Thursday, I would rather undertake to table these documents next sitting week than this week, given that I have only one more day in this week.
(b) the new production contract between the Forest Products Commission and Nannup Timber Processing Pty Ltd; and (c) the criteria by which the successful timber mills determined by the request for proposals process were chosen?
(c) the criteria by which the successful timber mills determined by the request for proposals process were chosen?
Yes, I believe I can table the production contract with NTP; it should be a public document. Certainly, there is absolutely no difficulty in tabling the criteria by which mills were chosen in the request for proposals process. I imagine there is a report of the probity auditor because the request for proposals process was overseen by a probity auditor, and no doubt the probity auditor would have reported to the General Manager of the Forest Products Commission. I undertake to investigate whether the probity auditor’s report, if it exists, is in a form that can be tabled. I believe it should be, but it is possible that the probity auditor’s report, because of the nature of the contract overseeing process it had, may well contain confidential material that will prevent its being tabled. I am keen to table it if I can. There may be a question mark about the first report, but tabling the other two documents should not be a problem. Given that today is Thursday, I would rather undertake to table these documents next sitting week than this week, given that I have only one more day in this week.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more