❓ Hon. Ravlich questions the Department of Training and Workforce Development's decision not to reopen the Productivity Places Program variation process despite increased Commonwealth funding. Hon. Collier clarifies the Commonwealth funding was for a different program and the department sought State funding instead.
AnsweredQoN 339Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
PRODUCTIVITY PLACES PROGRAM
I refer to the email of 18 March 2010 to registered training organisations from the manager, training markets that the Department of Training and Workforce Development was seeking additional funding to reopen the closed Productivity Places program variation process. (1) Given that the commonwealth government announced on 29 March that funding would double from $25 million to $50 million, why did the department not reopen the PPP variation process? (2) If this was not the additional funding the department was seeking, what funding was being referred to in the email? Hon PETER COLLIER
I refer to the email of 18 March 2010 to registered training organisations from the manager, training markets that the Department of Training and Workforce Development was seeking additional funding to reopen the closed Productivity Places program variation process. (1) Given that the commonwealth government announced on 29 March that funding would double from $25 million to $50 million, why did the department not reopen the PPP variation process? (2) If this was not the additional funding the department was seeking, what funding was being referred to in the email? Hon PETER COLLIER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
(1) Given that the commonwealth government announced on 29 March that funding would double from $25 million to $50 million, why did the department not reopen the PPP variation process? (2) If this was not the additional funding the department was seeking, what funding was being referred to in the email? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
(2) If this was not the additional funding the department was seeking, what funding was being referred to in the email? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
(1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
(2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
(1) Given that the commonwealth government announced on 29 March that funding would double from $25 million to $50 million, why did the department not reopen the PPP variation process? (2) If this was not the additional funding the department was seeking, what funding was being referred to in the email? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
(2) If this was not the additional funding the department was seeking, what funding was being referred to in the email? Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
Hon PETER COLLIER replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
(1) The commonwealth government announcement relates to the Enterprise Based Productivity Places program, which is administered by the commonwealth. No funding from this program is provided to Western Australia. (2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
(2) The funding referred to in the department’s email was a submission to the state government for additional funding to support the increased demand. The state government announced an additional $19.4 million over 2009–10 and 2010–11 to purchase 7 600 additional training places.
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.