❓ A parliamentary question regarding Alcoa's Supplementary Property Purchase Program (SPPP) and a specific property purchase dispute. The Minister clarifies the timeline and Alcoa's position, denying any obligation to purchase the property.
AnsweredQoN 365Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
ALCOA — SUPPLEMENTARY PROPERTY PURCHASE PROGRAM
Further to question without notice 192 in relation to Alcoa and the supplementary property purchase program — (1) Is the minister aware of a letter dated 19 December 2007 from the SPPP administrator Hendy Cowan to Mr Geoffrey Blythe confirming that Alcoa would purchase the property at lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup—the property—for an agreed sum of $550 000? (2) Is the minister aware that Alcoa declined to purchase the Blythe property without giving reason to Mr and Mrs Blythe? (3) Why were the Blythes told by the minister in a letter dated 25 January 2008 that they had missed the 30 June deadline when the SPPP administrator was still dealing with their property after that date, as evidenced in the letter dated 19 December? (4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST
Further to question without notice 192 in relation to Alcoa and the supplementary property purchase program — (1) Is the minister aware of a letter dated 19 December 2007 from the SPPP administrator Hendy Cowan to Mr Geoffrey Blythe confirming that Alcoa would purchase the property at lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup—the property—for an agreed sum of $550 000? (2) Is the minister aware that Alcoa declined to purchase the Blythe property without giving reason to Mr and Mrs Blythe? (3) Why were the Blythes told by the minister in a letter dated 25 January 2008 that they had missed the 30 June deadline when the SPPP administrator was still dealing with their property after that date, as evidenced in the letter dated 19 December? (4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(1) Is the minister aware of a letter dated 19 December 2007 from the SPPP administrator Hendy Cowan to Mr Geoffrey Blythe confirming that Alcoa would purchase the property at lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup—the property—for an agreed sum of $550 000? (2) Is the minister aware that Alcoa declined to purchase the Blythe property without giving reason to Mr and Mrs Blythe? (3) Why were the Blythes told by the minister in a letter dated 25 January 2008 that they had missed the 30 June deadline when the SPPP administrator was still dealing with their property after that date, as evidenced in the letter dated 19 December? (4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(2) Is the minister aware that Alcoa declined to purchase the Blythe property without giving reason to Mr and Mrs Blythe? (3) Why were the Blythes told by the minister in a letter dated 25 January 2008 that they had missed the 30 June deadline when the SPPP administrator was still dealing with their property after that date, as evidenced in the letter dated 19 December? (4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(3) Why were the Blythes told by the minister in a letter dated 25 January 2008 that they had missed the 30 June deadline when the SPPP administrator was still dealing with their property after that date, as evidenced in the letter dated 19 December? (4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(1) Is the minister aware of a letter dated 19 December 2007 from the SPPP administrator Hendy Cowan to Mr Geoffrey Blythe confirming that Alcoa would purchase the property at lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup—the property—for an agreed sum of $550 000? (2) Is the minister aware that Alcoa declined to purchase the Blythe property without giving reason to Mr and Mrs Blythe? (3) Why were the Blythes told by the minister in a letter dated 25 January 2008 that they had missed the 30 June deadline when the SPPP administrator was still dealing with their property after that date, as evidenced in the letter dated 19 December? (4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(2) Is the minister aware that Alcoa declined to purchase the Blythe property without giving reason to Mr and Mrs Blythe? (3) Why were the Blythes told by the minister in a letter dated 25 January 2008 that they had missed the 30 June deadline when the SPPP administrator was still dealing with their property after that date, as evidenced in the letter dated 19 December? (4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(3) Why were the Blythes told by the minister in a letter dated 25 January 2008 that they had missed the 30 June deadline when the SPPP administrator was still dealing with their property after that date, as evidenced in the letter dated 19 December? (4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(4) Is it not true that the deadline has been extended for the finalisation of the SPPP given the high number of applications from property owners? (5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(5) Is it not also true that the new dates have yet to be finalised, and the SPPP is still operating? (6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(6) Can the minister instruct Alcoa to honour the terms and spirit of the SPPP and purchase the Blythes’ property for fair market value now? (7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(7) If no to (6), why not? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(1) No. However, I have been advised that a valuation of lot 73 Salisbury Road, Cookernup was completed under the provisions of the deed of undertaking and sent to Mr and Mrs Blythe in November 2006—known as “the offer”. I am further advised that the SPPP administrator’s office sent a review of this valuation to Alcoa on 19 December 2007. (2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(2)-(3) No. It is clear that Mr and Mrs Blythe did not advise the SPPP administrator of their acceptance of the offer by the 30 June 2007 deadline specified in the deed. I understand that the administrator agreed to seek a review of the valuation at the request of the owners, but Mr Blythe was advised that the delay in accepting the offer meant the decision to purchase rested entirely with Alcoa. The Blythes were deemed by Alcoa to have rejected the offer. (4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(4) I am advised that Alcoa has accepted some offers based on valuations completed after the deadline of 30 June 2007. This is because valuations of a number of eligible properties could not be completed before 30 June 2007 due to the large number of applicants and the limited availability of independent valuers. As stated in the answer to (1), Mr and Mrs Blythe received their valuation in November 2006. (5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(5) All valuations have now been completed. Some property owners who recently received valuations under the farm business continuation option are still to decide whether to progress under the program. (6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(6) No. (7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
(7) The parties to the deed are bound by its terms.
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.