❓ The Minister for Racing and Gaming criticises the Liberal Party's stance on the government's liquor reform proposals, highlighting perceived inconsistencies and influence from vested interests. The response includes accusations and parliamentary interventions.
AnsweredQoN 694Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
LIQUOR REFORM PROPOSAL - LIBERAL PARTY’S POSITION
Can the minister describe the Liberal Party’s latest position in response to the government’s liquor reform proposals? Mr M. McGOWAN
Can the minister describe the Liberal Party’s latest position in response to the government’s liquor reform proposals? Mr M. McGOWAN
AnswerView source ↗
Indeed I can. Last week after I had announced the government’s liquor reform package, the shadow minister for Racing and Gaming, the member for South Perth, described it as exciting. He said further that the package looked fairly sound. In addition, he was quoted in The Australian of 21 September as saying the following - Our concern that restaurants could become quasi bars has been addressed to some extent He was referring to the government’s proposed measures. This week, the Liberal Party has announced a policy position that will hurt small business and deny choice to consumers. First, it announced that restaurants - Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : What are you talking about, minister? Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN replied: Indeed I can. Last week after I had announced the government’s liquor reform package, the shadow minister for Racing and Gaming, the member for South Perth, described it as exciting. He said further that the package looked fairly sound. In addition, he was quoted in The Australian of 21 September as saying the following - Our concern that restaurants could become quasi bars has been addressed to some extent He was referring to the government’s proposed measures. This week, the Liberal Party has announced a policy position that will hurt small business and deny choice to consumers. First, it announced that restaurants - Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : What are you talking about, minister? Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Indeed I can. Last week after I had announced the government’s liquor reform package, the shadow minister for Racing and Gaming, the member for South Perth, described it as exciting. He said further that the package looked fairly sound. In addition, he was quoted in The Australian of 21 September as saying the following - Our concern that restaurants could become quasi bars has been addressed to some extent He was referring to the government’s proposed measures. This week, the Liberal Party has announced a policy position that will hurt small business and deny choice to consumers. First, it announced that restaurants - Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : What are you talking about, minister? Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : What are you talking about, minister? Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN replied: Indeed I can. Last week after I had announced the government’s liquor reform package, the shadow minister for Racing and Gaming, the member for South Perth, described it as exciting. He said further that the package looked fairly sound. In addition, he was quoted in The Australian of 21 September as saying the following - Our concern that restaurants could become quasi bars has been addressed to some extent He was referring to the government’s proposed measures. This week, the Liberal Party has announced a policy position that will hurt small business and deny choice to consumers. First, it announced that restaurants - Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : What are you talking about, minister? Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Indeed I can. Last week after I had announced the government’s liquor reform package, the shadow minister for Racing and Gaming, the member for South Perth, described it as exciting. He said further that the package looked fairly sound. In addition, he was quoted in The Australian of 21 September as saying the following - Our concern that restaurants could become quasi bars has been addressed to some extent He was referring to the government’s proposed measures. This week, the Liberal Party has announced a policy position that will hurt small business and deny choice to consumers. First, it announced that restaurants - Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : What are you talking about, minister? Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : What are you talking about, minister? Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : The shadow Minister for Tourism is attacking the policy when she told the tourism industry all over the state that she would back the policy. People from the industry told me that was what she said. However, apparently her word is not all that honest. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The minister made reference to the member for Carine being not all that honest. Given the standards you have been setting on parliamentary conduct, Mr Speaker, I would think that that was unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
The SPEAKER : I was listening to the minister carefully. I do not think his comment breaches standards, but it comes very close, so I direct that the minister withdraw his comments. I am sure he can think of other terminology. Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : I withdraw. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN : The first position the Liberal Party has indicated is that only 33 per cent of patrons should be able to have a drink without a meal. That policy position is patently ridiculous. The shadow minister made a comparison with the situation in Sydney. Only 10 per cent of restaurants in Sydney have taken up the permits to do that. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : The member for Carine can damage small business all she likes. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr R.C. KUCERA : You sound like the Harper Valley PTA. Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Ms K. Hodson - Thomas : You can get back in your box over there. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
The SPEAKER : Order! Therein lies the problem of accepting interjections - they get out of hand. Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : It is a silly proposition that only 33 per cent of patrons can have a drink without a meal. Such a policy would be completely unenforceable. It would be necessary to engage food marshals in restaurants go around and ask people whether they had had a meal or intended to have a meal. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
Mr M. McGOWAN : Secondly, the Liberal Party’s position is that small bars could operate only in the city of Perth and perhaps the city of Fremantle. That policy would deny choice to all those people in Mt Lawley, Joondalup, Rockingham, Mandurah, Kalgoorlie, Albany or other parts of the state who want to set up a small business. Why is that the Liberal Party’s position? As we learnt in this morning’s newspaper, the member for Leschenault drives policy for the Liberal Party. The Leader of the Liberal Party does not have the capacity to stand up to him on these issues. Surely the Liberal Party has learnt over the past few years that it should not listen to the member for Leschenault on important matters of principle. In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
In this case, the Liberal Party has demonstrated that it is owned by vested interests. All we had to do was refer to the Australian Hotels Association policies on this matter and we would have learnt what the Liberal Party intended to do. It is ignoring the entire rest of the community that has called for these changes. To find out the position on the rest of the changes that the Liberal Party is due to make a decision on, we need only ask the AHA what its policy is. I received an e-mail today from a Liberal Party candidate at the last election. He had the following to stay on the Liberal party’s policies - I am appalled that the Liberal MP’s who could have been my colleagues won’t support policies that should in fact be Liberal policies. Deregulating and liberalising laws should be what the Liberal Party support, but sadly for the most base and self-serving reasons, they don’t. I’m disgusted.
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.