❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice requests the Premier to provide the total cost of various government advertising campaigns, including those related to Ningaloo Reef, the Burrup campaign, police enterprise bargaining, health funding, nuclear waste, fire levy changes, and the 2003-04 budget. The Premier provides some figures and historical context.
AnsweredQoN 1280Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Will the Premier please advise the total cost, including purchase of advertising time, production, planning and any other costs, of each of the following government advertising campaigns - (a) television and newspaper advertisements calling for submissions on the future of the Ningaloo Reef; (b) television advertisements relating to the skill up for the Burrup campaign; (c) newspaper advertisements relating to the enterprise bargaining agreement between Western Australian police officers and the State Government; (d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(a) television and newspaper advertisements calling for submissions on the future of the Ningaloo Reef; (b) television advertisements relating to the skill up for the Burrup campaign; (c) newspaper advertisements relating to the enterprise bargaining agreement between Western Australian police officers and the State Government; (d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(b) television advertisements relating to the skill up for the Burrup campaign; (c) newspaper advertisements relating to the enterprise bargaining agreement between Western Australian police officers and the State Government; (d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(c) newspaper advertisements relating to the enterprise bargaining agreement between Western Australian police officers and the State Government; (d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(a) television and newspaper advertisements calling for submissions on the future of the Ningaloo Reef; (b) television advertisements relating to the skill up for the Burrup campaign; (c) newspaper advertisements relating to the enterprise bargaining agreement between Western Australian police officers and the State Government; (d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(b) television advertisements relating to the skill up for the Burrup campaign; (c) newspaper advertisements relating to the enterprise bargaining agreement between Western Australian police officers and the State Government; (d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(c) newspaper advertisements relating to the enterprise bargaining agreement between Western Australian police officers and the State Government; (d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(d) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government to increase health funding in Western Australia; (e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(e) newspaper advertisements calling on the federal Government not to locate a nuclear waste dump in Western Australia; (f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(f) television and newspaper advertisements relating to changes in the collection of the fire and emergency services levy; and (g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(g) newspaper, radio and television advertisements relating to the 2003-04 budget? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(a) $280 632.22; (b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(b) $136 569.44; (c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(c) $4 663.02; (d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(d) $12 708.36; (e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(e) $9 671.13; (f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(f) $166 984.76; (g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
(g) the 2003-04 budget was accompanied by an advertising campaign urging the community to view the budget information material. Prior to the budget and in the interests of accountability, the Treasurer advised the House that the budget information campaign would cost in the order of $170 000. Details of the actual cost are being sought for the member from the relevant agency. For the member’s information, the Court Government appears to have spent $184 171 in 1997-98, $168 170 in 1998-99, $214 137 in 1999-2000 and $164 359 in 2000-01.
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.