❓ Hon Colin de Grussa questions the Minister for Fisheries regarding the decision not to award the tender for the South Coast Marine Park socio-economic impact assessment, citing value for money concerns. The Minister refutes the premise, stating there was no consensus recommendation and the offered price significantly exceeded the budget.
AnsweredQoN 90Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
SOUTH COAST MARINE PARK
90. Hon COLIN de GRUSSA to the parliamentary secretary
representing the Minister for Fisheries:
I refer to the minister's
response to question without notice 1431, asked by me on 14 November 2023,
regarding the request for tender for the
provision of services for the south coast marine park socio-economic impact
assessment.
(1) Given that it
was the consensus recommendation of the evaluation panel to award the tender
following the confirmation of the availability of the necessary funds from each
of the three agencies involved, who took the decision not to award the tender
based on value for money?
(2) On what basis was it determined
that the tender did not constitute value for money?
90. Hon COLIN de GRUSSA to the parliamentary secretary
representing the Minister for Fisheries:
I refer to the minister's
response to question without notice 1431, asked by me on 14 November 2023,
regarding the request for tender for the
provision of services for the south coast marine park socio-economic impact
assessment.
(1) Given that it
was the consensus recommendation of the evaluation panel to award the tender
following the confirmation of the availability of the necessary funds from each
of the three agencies involved, who took the decision not to award the tender
based on value for money?
(2) On what basis was it determined
that the tender did not constitute value for money?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice
of the question. The following answer has been provided to me by the Minister
for Fisheries.
(1)–(2) The
premise of the question is incorrect. There was no consensus recommendation by
an evaluation panel to award the tender, so
the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development declined all
offers. The offered price of the preferred respondent was over three
times greater than the pre-tender approved budget, and a value-for-money
purchasing decision was difficult to establish.
of the question. The following answer has been provided to me by the Minister
for Fisheries.
(1)–(2) The
premise of the question is incorrect. There was no consensus recommendation by
an evaluation panel to award the tender, so
the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development declined all
offers. The offered price of the preferred respondent was over three
times greater than the pre-tender approved budget, and a value-for-money
purchasing decision was difficult to establish.
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.