MINERALOGY PTY LTD
ARBITRATION — STATE SOLICITOR ADVICE — BRIEFING NOTE
782. Hon PETER COLLIER to
the Leader of the House representing the Premier:
This question without notice of which some notice was given
is asked on behalf of Hon Michael Mischin, who is away on urgent parliamentary
business.
I refer to the Premier's
tabling, in the course of his response to a question from one of his own
backbenchers on 13 August 2020, a briefing note of that date addressed to him
and the Attorney General from the State Solicitor, tabled paper 3566, advising
that then Deputy State Solicitor had given advice to appeal the 2014
arbitration award in Mineralogy Pty Ltd and another versus the state of Western
Australia.
(1) Who requested
that briefing note, and when and why; and will the Premier table that request,
and, if not, why not?
(2) Why is the
State Solicitor not able to provide to the Premier or the Attorney General a
copy of the May 2014 advice because ''it was provided under a former
government'' but is able to disclose that the advice was to appeal?
(3) For the
information of Parliament and future governments, can the Premier set out
precisely the protocols the State Solicitor claims to be adhering to; and, if
not, why not?
(4) To whom was
the 2014 advice addressed?
(5) Is there
evidence that the then responsible minister saw the advice; and if so, what?
Hon SUE
ELLERY replied:
I thank the honourable member for
some notice of the question.
(1) The existence
of the 2014 advice came up in discussion and it was agreed the details should
be formalised in a briefing note as the request was not in writing and cannot
be tabled.
(2) As the shadow
Attorney is aware, a convention is in place by which advice and documents
provided to previous governments is not disclosed to incoming or future
governments without the consent of the Leader of the Opposition. That
convention, which is reflected in the Cabinet Handbook, is applied
conservatively. Out of an abundance of caution and given I was unaware whether
the advice was provided for the purposes of being considered by a cabinet, I
did not consider it appropriate that I be provided with a copy of the advice.
(3) See answer to
(2).
(4) I have not
seen or been provided with a copy of the advice and I am unable to confirm to
whom it was addressed.
(5) I am not
aware of any evidence that former minister Hon Colin Barnett saw the advice.
However, not only am I advised that in the usual course, it is a matter that
would be considered at ministerial or possibly even cabinet level. I am aware
from my personal experience, as no doubt the shadow Attorney General is from
his, that it is the very sort of matter that would be discussed at ministerial
level, possibly even with the Attorney General of the day.