❓ Treasurer Eric Ripper confirms Western Australia's AAA credit rating by Standard and Poor's with a stable outlook, criticising the previous government's financial management and accusing the Leader of the Opposition of 'doomsaying'.
AnsweredQoN 548Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
STATE FINANCE, CREDIT RATING
Will the Treasurer advise the House of the status of the State’s credit rating? Mr RIPPER
Will the Treasurer advise the House of the status of the State’s credit rating? Mr RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
I am extremely pleased to confirm that the rating agency Standard and Poor’s has confirmed the State’s AAA credit rating. Moreover, it confirmed it with a stable outlook. The ratings agency believes that the AAA credit rating will continue into the future. We have doomsaying from across the House; members opposite have talked down the State’s credit rating and economy. I have been waiting for this day; I have been waiting for the rating agency’s judgment. The rating agency has confirmed our AAA credit rating. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr RIPPER replied: I am extremely pleased to confirm that the rating agency Standard and Poor’s has confirmed the State’s AAA credit rating. Moreover, it confirmed it with a stable outlook. The ratings agency believes that the AAA credit rating will continue into the future. We have doomsaying from across the House; members opposite have talked down the State’s credit rating and economy. I have been waiting for this day; I have been waiting for the rating agency’s judgment. The rating agency has confirmed our AAA credit rating. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
I am extremely pleased to confirm that the rating agency Standard and Poor’s has confirmed the State’s AAA credit rating. Moreover, it confirmed it with a stable outlook. The ratings agency believes that the AAA credit rating will continue into the future. We have doomsaying from across the House; members opposite have talked down the State’s credit rating and economy. I have been waiting for this day; I have been waiting for the rating agency’s judgment. The rating agency has confirmed our AAA credit rating. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr RIPPER replied: I am extremely pleased to confirm that the rating agency Standard and Poor’s has confirmed the State’s AAA credit rating. Moreover, it confirmed it with a stable outlook. The ratings agency believes that the AAA credit rating will continue into the future. We have doomsaying from across the House; members opposite have talked down the State’s credit rating and economy. I have been waiting for this day; I have been waiting for the rating agency’s judgment. The rating agency has confirmed our AAA credit rating. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
I am extremely pleased to confirm that the rating agency Standard and Poor’s has confirmed the State’s AAA credit rating. Moreover, it confirmed it with a stable outlook. The ratings agency believes that the AAA credit rating will continue into the future. We have doomsaying from across the House; members opposite have talked down the State’s credit rating and economy. I have been waiting for this day; I have been waiting for the rating agency’s judgment. The rating agency has confirmed our AAA credit rating. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
The SPEAKER: Order, members! I cannot hear the Treasurer’s response. I am sure members on my left want to hear his answer. Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr RIPPER: I can understand why members opposite talked down the State’s credit rating. No doubt, they reflected on their own performance. I visited Standard and Poor’s in Hong Kong. I spoke to it about the record of the State. We have to live down the legacy of the previous Government. We have to overcome the souring of the relationship between the ratings agencies and the State as a result of the policies of the previous Government. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition might interject and try to shout me down, but this is the point: he left us with four operating deficits, two forecast deficits and a rate of growth in debt that was accelerating to a position that was incompatible with the State’s AAA credit rating. The ratings agencies are, unfortunately, sceptical about the State because of the legacy left by people like the Leader of the Opposition. The agencies have a problem with the State. Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr Barnett interjected. Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition ought to listen to this because he has done damage to the State. He has done damage in two ways: first, through the legacy he left us and, secondly, through his doomsaying about the economy. He ought to start acting in the interests of the State. Naturally the ratings agencies are sceptical because they have had experience of a State Government of Western Australia - the Court Government. That Government failed to live up to its financial management targets. This Government has set itself targets. It has had the AAA credit rating confirmed, but it is not going to rest on its laurels. Financial management is a day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year issue. It is the responsibility of every minister in the Government every day. We intend to maintain our commitment to our financial management targets. International economic uncertainty imposes additional challenges on the Government, but it has exercised financial restraint and its financial management policy has been vindicated by Standard and Poor’s. I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
I will conclude on the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the National Party has seen him for the fraud that he is and the ratings agencies also understand what a fraud he is on these issues. Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr Barnett interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr RIPPER: By interjection the Leader of the Opposition has accused me of lying to the Parliament, and I think he should withdraw. Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr DAY: The Leader of the Opposition did not make any accusation; he asked a question by way of interjection. There was no accusation or assertion. Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr BARNETT: I asked the Deputy Premier whether he lied, because he made a claim that Standard and Poor’s had commented to him about me and I asked him whether that was the truth. In effect, did he lie about that? Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr KOBELKE: The issue is not whether or not a statement is true; the fact is that the Leader of the Opposition used unparliamentary language. On that basis, he should be asked to withdraw. The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
The SPEAKER: Order, members! I did not hear the comment. If the Leader of the Opposition accused the Treasurer of lying, I ask him to withdraw it. If he did not say it, I will take his word on it. Questions without Notice Resumed
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.