❓ Ms. Saffioti questions the Minister for Planning regarding the withholding of information related to a public relations contract for Whiteman Park, following an Auditor General's report finding the decision inappropriate. The Minister defends the decision, citing commercial sensitivity and confidentiality concerns.
AnsweredQoN 763Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
WA
PLANNING COMMISSION — PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC RELATIONS — WHITEMAN PARK
763. Ms R. SAFFIOTI to the
Minister for Planning:
I refer to today's Auditor General report and the
finding that the minister's decision not to release information
concerning a contract for public relations services to Whiteman Park ''was
not reasonable and was therefore not appropriate''.
(1) Why did the
Department of Planning seek advice from the Department of Finance concerning
the release of tender information after initially including this information in
the draft answer prepared for me?
(2) Was the
minister's office involved in discussing this with the Department of
Planning in relation to the preparation of that answer?
(3) Why was
the Department of Planning's freedom of information officer not
consulted as recommended by the Department of Finance?
PLANNING COMMISSION — PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC RELATIONS — WHITEMAN PARK
763. Ms R. SAFFIOTI to the
Minister for Planning:
I refer to today's Auditor General report and the
finding that the minister's decision not to release information
concerning a contract for public relations services to Whiteman Park ''was
not reasonable and was therefore not appropriate''.
(1) Why did the
Department of Planning seek advice from the Department of Finance concerning
the release of tender information after initially including this information in
the draft answer prepared for me?
(2) Was the
minister's office involved in discussing this with the Department of
Planning in relation to the preparation of that answer?
(3) Why was
the Department of Planning's freedom of information officer not
consulted as recommended by the Department of Finance?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3)
I provided some information on this issue immediately after question time
yesterday. It is hardly a big deal, but for the information of members, the
original question asked by the member for West Swan related to the provision of
public relations services for Whiteman Park management. She wanted details of
all the tenders that were provided in addition to the successful tender. The
answer that I gave at the time was that it was considered commercially
sensitive information that was not appropriate to be made public. As is a
requirement under the Financial Management Act, I think it is, that answer was
referred—or under the standing orders; I am not sure which it is—to
the Auditor General for his view. As the member has just expressed, the Auditor General's view is that the
information should have been made available.
I am sensitive to the fact that
people who provide tenders for the provision of services to the government do
not necessarily expect them to be made public, particularly if they are not the
successful tenderer. As I said yesterday, we are asking those companies that
provided tenders whether they have any objection to the information being made
public; and, if they do not, obviously we will. I understand in the tender
documents that there is the option for submitters to tick a box if they require
the information to be kept confidential. That was not done in all cases, but
perhaps the people submitting the tenders do not realise that it may come out
in the public arena through Parliament; it would not come out through any other
way. The only motivation behind the answer that was given was to protect the
commercial sensitivity and confidentiality of the companies involved. There was
no other motivation. We are getting further advice, as I have said.
I provided some information on this issue immediately after question time
yesterday. It is hardly a big deal, but for the information of members, the
original question asked by the member for West Swan related to the provision of
public relations services for Whiteman Park management. She wanted details of
all the tenders that were provided in addition to the successful tender. The
answer that I gave at the time was that it was considered commercially
sensitive information that was not appropriate to be made public. As is a
requirement under the Financial Management Act, I think it is, that answer was
referred—or under the standing orders; I am not sure which it is—to
the Auditor General for his view. As the member has just expressed, the Auditor General's view is that the
information should have been made available.
I am sensitive to the fact that
people who provide tenders for the provision of services to the government do
not necessarily expect them to be made public, particularly if they are not the
successful tenderer. As I said yesterday, we are asking those companies that
provided tenders whether they have any objection to the information being made
public; and, if they do not, obviously we will. I understand in the tender
documents that there is the option for submitters to tick a box if they require
the information to be kept confidential. That was not done in all cases, but
perhaps the people submitting the tenders do not realise that it may come out
in the public arena through Parliament; it would not come out through any other
way. The only motivation behind the answer that was given was to protect the
commercial sensitivity and confidentiality of the companies involved. There was
no other motivation. We are getting further advice, as I have said.
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.