❓ The WA Education Minister confirms concerns about the financial burden of the federal government's 'Computers in Schools' program, highlighting the disproportionate cost to the state.
AnsweredQoN 80Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT COMPUTERS IN SCHOOLS PROGRAM
Can the minister confirm newspaper reports this morning that the federal government’s computers in schools program is likely to impose a huge financial burden on the state government? Dr E. CONSTABLE
Can the minister confirm newspaper reports this morning that the federal government’s computers in schools program is likely to impose a huge financial burden on the state government? Dr E. CONSTABLE
AnswerView source ↗
Indeed, I can confirm the report in the newspaper this morning. Point of Order Mr C.J. TALLENTIRE : Mr Speaker, we cannot hear the minister. The SPEAKER : Perhaps the member might suggest to members on his side to keep the low hum down. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: Indeed, I can confirm the report in the newspaper this morning. Point of Order Mr C.J. TALLENTIRE : Mr Speaker, we cannot hear the minister. The SPEAKER : Perhaps the member might suggest to members on his side to keep the low hum down. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Indeed, I can confirm the report in the newspaper this morning. Point of Order Mr C.J. TALLENTIRE : Mr Speaker, we cannot hear the minister. The SPEAKER : Perhaps the member might suggest to members on his side to keep the low hum down. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
The SPEAKER : Perhaps the member might suggest to members on his side to keep the low hum down. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Dr E. CONSTABLE replied: Indeed, I can confirm the report in the newspaper this morning. Point of Order Mr C.J. TALLENTIRE : Mr Speaker, we cannot hear the minister. The SPEAKER : Perhaps the member might suggest to members on his side to keep the low hum down. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Indeed, I can confirm the report in the newspaper this morning. Point of Order Mr C.J. TALLENTIRE : Mr Speaker, we cannot hear the minister. The SPEAKER : Perhaps the member might suggest to members on his side to keep the low hum down. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
The SPEAKER : Perhaps the member might suggest to members on his side to keep the low hum down. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! There is no point of order. I will determine whether a member is not speaking loudly enough. Might I suggest to everybody in the chamber — Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Mr M.P. Murray : So we’re not allowed to listen? The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
The SPEAKER : Order, member! I suggest to the member for Gosnells that he listen very carefully to everybody in this place. If members on either side of the house speak and other people cannot hear, I might make a decision at that point. I would like all members to maintain this level of silence. That would be perfect; that would be wonderful. However, I do not take it as a point of order. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr E. CONSTABLE : I was just about to say that we all remember the Rudd government’s digital education revolution—the great promise in the run-up to the last federal election. There was an expectation by everyone that, over a four or five-year period, all year 9 to 12 students would have a computer. However, the crunch was that for every dollar the federal government was prepared to spend, it also expected the states to spend over $3. Of course, the states do not have that sort of money in their forward estimates when federal parties decide to make a commitment during an election campaign. Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
Providing computers in schools is a very good idea. Certainly, a lot of research shows that disadvantaged students in schools benefit greatly from having computers, as do all students. However, often disadvantaged students do not have computers in their homes, so to have them in schools is essential. None of the jurisdictions around Australia is happy with this because of the costs that will be imposed on them by this promise. A review of those costs has been conducted by the Rudd government, and I understand the review will be presented at the meeting of the Council of Australian Governments this weekend. We would be happy to cooperate with the federal government in this venture, but not when we have to spend $3 for every dollar it will spend to fulfil the promise it made in an election campaign.
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.