❓ Opposition asks Treasurer to guarantee the Energy Minister directs Synergy to halt negotiations to send IT jobs to India. Treasurer responds that the Minister is already addressing the issue and seeking legal advice to prevent job losses offshore, highlighting the government's opposition to the move.
AnsweredQoN 263Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
SYNERGY — INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY JOBS TO INDIA
Will the Treasurer confirm that he will use his concurrent powers as Treasurer under section 112 of the Electricity Corporations Act 2005 to guarantee that the Minister for Energy directs Synergy to immediately end all negotiations designed to see 120 Western Australian information technology jobs exported offshore to India? Mr T.R. BUSWELL
Will the Treasurer confirm that he will use his concurrent powers as Treasurer under section 112 of the Electricity Corporations Act 2005 to guarantee that the Minister for Energy directs Synergy to immediately end all negotiations designed to see 120 Western Australian information technology jobs exported offshore to India? Mr T.R. BUSWELL
AnswerView source ↗
I will provide some answers on the issue that has emerged around the transformation that Synergy is attempting to drive through its business. It is important to understand the process. I will comment shortly specifically on the potential for some work to be exported offshore. It needs to be clearly understood that Synergy is currently undertaking a major reform and change in its business model. That change is designed to help Synergy be more competitive as increased competition enters into the retail component in particular of the Western Australian energy sector. As part of that transformation process, Synergy intends to outsource some of its positions. My understanding is that the positions will be those that would normally be determined to be back-office positions. My advice is that Synergy currently has a tendering process in place to determine how that outsourcing will ultimately play out. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and detailed to Synergy that it is his view and the view of the government—I am more than happy to table the document for the consideration of the Leader of the Opposition and his input—that the decision to outsource positions overseas, if indeed it is made, is not supported by the minister or, by extension, the state government. According to the letter, the minister has asked the board to reconsider its decision in this matter, particularly in light of current economic circumstances. The minister has advised me that he is seeking legal advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the extent to which he can direct Synergy not to take action that will effectively result in the removal of those jobs from Western Australia. I am confident that the minister is taking all necessary steps to ensure that his and the government’s will is reflected in the actions of Synergy. I also think it is important to understand the reform process that Synergy is undertaking, what Synergy calls its business transformation process. It was a reform transformation process under which Synergy, during the development of the business case that sat around that process, presented to government that it would be outsourcing some jobs. As I understand it, Synergy also presented to government that as a result of that outsourcing, there would be job losses or headcount reductions at Synergy. That is part of the process that the Leader of the Opposition knows about because he signed off on it. Yes, there is an issue about the potential for Synergy to move jobs offshore. The position of the government is clear and unambiguous: it should not happen. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and informed it of that position. In addition, the Minister for Energy is seeking advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the exact nature of the instruction that he can issue to Synergy to deliver that outcome. In my view he is handling this situation in a professional and proper manner. He does not need any additional advice from me because he is clearly doing the right thing and protecting Western Australian jobs. [See paper 778.]
Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: I will provide some answers on the issue that has emerged around the transformation that Synergy is attempting to drive through its business. It is important to understand the process. I will comment shortly specifically on the potential for some work to be exported offshore. It needs to be clearly understood that Synergy is currently undertaking a major reform and change in its business model. That change is designed to help Synergy be more competitive as increased competition enters into the retail component in particular of the Western Australian energy sector. As part of that transformation process, Synergy intends to outsource some of its positions. My understanding is that the positions will be those that would normally be determined to be back-office positions. My advice is that Synergy currently has a tendering process in place to determine how that outsourcing will ultimately play out. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and detailed to Synergy that it is his view and the view of the government—I am more than happy to table the document for the consideration of the Leader of the Opposition and his input—that the decision to outsource positions overseas, if indeed it is made, is not supported by the minister or, by extension, the state government. According to the letter, the minister has asked the board to reconsider its decision in this matter, particularly in light of current economic circumstances. The minister has advised me that he is seeking legal advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the extent to which he can direct Synergy not to take action that will effectively result in the removal of those jobs from Western Australia. I am confident that the minister is taking all necessary steps to ensure that his and the government’s will is reflected in the actions of Synergy. I also think it is important to understand the reform process that Synergy is undertaking, what Synergy calls its business transformation process. It was a reform transformation process under which Synergy, during the development of the business case that sat around that process, presented to government that it would be outsourcing some jobs. As I understand it, Synergy also presented to government that as a result of that outsourcing, there would be job losses or headcount reductions at Synergy. That is part of the process that the Leader of the Opposition knows about because he signed off on it. Yes, there is an issue about the potential for Synergy to move jobs offshore. The position of the government is clear and unambiguous: it should not happen. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and informed it of that position. In addition, the Minister for Energy is seeking advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the exact nature of the instruction that he can issue to Synergy to deliver that outcome. In my view he is handling this situation in a professional and proper manner. He does not need any additional advice from me because he is clearly doing the right thing and protecting Western Australian jobs. [See paper 778.]
I will provide some answers on the issue that has emerged around the transformation that Synergy is attempting to drive through its business. It is important to understand the process. I will comment shortly specifically on the potential for some work to be exported offshore. It needs to be clearly understood that Synergy is currently undertaking a major reform and change in its business model. That change is designed to help Synergy be more competitive as increased competition enters into the retail component in particular of the Western Australian energy sector. As part of that transformation process, Synergy intends to outsource some of its positions. My understanding is that the positions will be those that would normally be determined to be back-office positions. My advice is that Synergy currently has a tendering process in place to determine how that outsourcing will ultimately play out. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and detailed to Synergy that it is his view and the view of the government—I am more than happy to table the document for the consideration of the Leader of the Opposition and his input—that the decision to outsource positions overseas, if indeed it is made, is not supported by the minister or, by extension, the state government. According to the letter, the minister has asked the board to reconsider its decision in this matter, particularly in light of current economic circumstances. The minister has advised me that he is seeking legal advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the extent to which he can direct Synergy not to take action that will effectively result in the removal of those jobs from Western Australia. I am confident that the minister is taking all necessary steps to ensure that his and the government’s will is reflected in the actions of Synergy. I also think it is important to understand the reform process that Synergy is undertaking, what Synergy calls its business transformation process. It was a reform transformation process under which Synergy, during the development of the business case that sat around that process, presented to government that it would be outsourcing some jobs. As I understand it, Synergy also presented to government that as a result of that outsourcing, there would be job losses or headcount reductions at Synergy. That is part of the process that the Leader of the Opposition knows about because he signed off on it. Yes, there is an issue about the potential for Synergy to move jobs offshore. The position of the government is clear and unambiguous: it should not happen. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and informed it of that position. In addition, the Minister for Energy is seeking advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the exact nature of the instruction that he can issue to Synergy to deliver that outcome. In my view he is handling this situation in a professional and proper manner. He does not need any additional advice from me because he is clearly doing the right thing and protecting Western Australian jobs. [See paper 778.]
I also think it is important to understand the reform process that Synergy is undertaking, what Synergy calls its business transformation process. It was a reform transformation process under which Synergy, during the development of the business case that sat around that process, presented to government that it would be outsourcing some jobs. As I understand it, Synergy also presented to government that as a result of that outsourcing, there would be job losses or headcount reductions at Synergy. That is part of the process that the Leader of the Opposition knows about because he signed off on it. Yes, there is an issue about the potential for Synergy to move jobs offshore. The position of the government is clear and unambiguous: it should not happen. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and informed it of that position. In addition, the Minister for Energy is seeking advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the exact nature of the instruction that he can issue to Synergy to deliver that outcome. In my view he is handling this situation in a professional and proper manner. He does not need any additional advice from me because he is clearly doing the right thing and protecting Western Australian jobs. [See paper 778.]
[See paper 778.]
Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: I will provide some answers on the issue that has emerged around the transformation that Synergy is attempting to drive through its business. It is important to understand the process. I will comment shortly specifically on the potential for some work to be exported offshore. It needs to be clearly understood that Synergy is currently undertaking a major reform and change in its business model. That change is designed to help Synergy be more competitive as increased competition enters into the retail component in particular of the Western Australian energy sector. As part of that transformation process, Synergy intends to outsource some of its positions. My understanding is that the positions will be those that would normally be determined to be back-office positions. My advice is that Synergy currently has a tendering process in place to determine how that outsourcing will ultimately play out. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and detailed to Synergy that it is his view and the view of the government—I am more than happy to table the document for the consideration of the Leader of the Opposition and his input—that the decision to outsource positions overseas, if indeed it is made, is not supported by the minister or, by extension, the state government. According to the letter, the minister has asked the board to reconsider its decision in this matter, particularly in light of current economic circumstances. The minister has advised me that he is seeking legal advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the extent to which he can direct Synergy not to take action that will effectively result in the removal of those jobs from Western Australia. I am confident that the minister is taking all necessary steps to ensure that his and the government’s will is reflected in the actions of Synergy. I also think it is important to understand the reform process that Synergy is undertaking, what Synergy calls its business transformation process. It was a reform transformation process under which Synergy, during the development of the business case that sat around that process, presented to government that it would be outsourcing some jobs. As I understand it, Synergy also presented to government that as a result of that outsourcing, there would be job losses or headcount reductions at Synergy. That is part of the process that the Leader of the Opposition knows about because he signed off on it. Yes, there is an issue about the potential for Synergy to move jobs offshore. The position of the government is clear and unambiguous: it should not happen. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and informed it of that position. In addition, the Minister for Energy is seeking advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the exact nature of the instruction that he can issue to Synergy to deliver that outcome. In my view he is handling this situation in a professional and proper manner. He does not need any additional advice from me because he is clearly doing the right thing and protecting Western Australian jobs. [See paper 778.]
I will provide some answers on the issue that has emerged around the transformation that Synergy is attempting to drive through its business. It is important to understand the process. I will comment shortly specifically on the potential for some work to be exported offshore. It needs to be clearly understood that Synergy is currently undertaking a major reform and change in its business model. That change is designed to help Synergy be more competitive as increased competition enters into the retail component in particular of the Western Australian energy sector. As part of that transformation process, Synergy intends to outsource some of its positions. My understanding is that the positions will be those that would normally be determined to be back-office positions. My advice is that Synergy currently has a tendering process in place to determine how that outsourcing will ultimately play out. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and detailed to Synergy that it is his view and the view of the government—I am more than happy to table the document for the consideration of the Leader of the Opposition and his input—that the decision to outsource positions overseas, if indeed it is made, is not supported by the minister or, by extension, the state government. According to the letter, the minister has asked the board to reconsider its decision in this matter, particularly in light of current economic circumstances. The minister has advised me that he is seeking legal advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the extent to which he can direct Synergy not to take action that will effectively result in the removal of those jobs from Western Australia. I am confident that the minister is taking all necessary steps to ensure that his and the government’s will is reflected in the actions of Synergy. I also think it is important to understand the reform process that Synergy is undertaking, what Synergy calls its business transformation process. It was a reform transformation process under which Synergy, during the development of the business case that sat around that process, presented to government that it would be outsourcing some jobs. As I understand it, Synergy also presented to government that as a result of that outsourcing, there would be job losses or headcount reductions at Synergy. That is part of the process that the Leader of the Opposition knows about because he signed off on it. Yes, there is an issue about the potential for Synergy to move jobs offshore. The position of the government is clear and unambiguous: it should not happen. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and informed it of that position. In addition, the Minister for Energy is seeking advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the exact nature of the instruction that he can issue to Synergy to deliver that outcome. In my view he is handling this situation in a professional and proper manner. He does not need any additional advice from me because he is clearly doing the right thing and protecting Western Australian jobs. [See paper 778.]
I also think it is important to understand the reform process that Synergy is undertaking, what Synergy calls its business transformation process. It was a reform transformation process under which Synergy, during the development of the business case that sat around that process, presented to government that it would be outsourcing some jobs. As I understand it, Synergy also presented to government that as a result of that outsourcing, there would be job losses or headcount reductions at Synergy. That is part of the process that the Leader of the Opposition knows about because he signed off on it. Yes, there is an issue about the potential for Synergy to move jobs offshore. The position of the government is clear and unambiguous: it should not happen. The Minister for Energy has written to Synergy and informed it of that position. In addition, the Minister for Energy is seeking advice from the State Solicitor’s Office on the exact nature of the instruction that he can issue to Synergy to deliver that outcome. In my view he is handling this situation in a professional and proper manner. He does not need any additional advice from me because he is clearly doing the right thing and protecting Western Australian jobs. [See paper 778.]
[See paper 778.]
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.