❓ Opposition questions the Treasurer about guaranteeing a net operating surplus and maintaining the State's AAA credit rating. The Treasurer deflects by highlighting the previous government's deficits and accusing them of fiscal irresponsibility.
AnsweredQoN 9Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
STATE FINANCES, AAA CREDIT RATING
I challenge the Premier to table the agreement he referred to. However, my question is to the Treasurer. Dr Gallop: You should talk to Hendy Cowan; he will tell you about it. You cannot talk to them, just like you cannot talk to the man next to you; that is your problem. Mr BARNETT: Obviously the Premier will not table that document, so my question is to the Treasurer. Given the Premier’s failure yesterday to answer my question about the Government’s commitment to operating surpluses and the retention of the State’s AAA credit rating, I now ask - (1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER
I challenge the Premier to table the agreement he referred to. However, my question is to the Treasurer. Dr Gallop: You should talk to Hendy Cowan; he will tell you about it. You cannot talk to them, just like you cannot talk to the man next to you; that is your problem. Mr BARNETT: Obviously the Premier will not table that document, so my question is to the Treasurer. Given the Premier’s failure yesterday to answer my question about the Government’s commitment to operating surpluses and the retention of the State’s AAA credit rating, I now ask - (1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
Dr Gallop: You should talk to Hendy Cowan; he will tell you about it. You cannot talk to them, just like you cannot talk to the man next to you; that is your problem. Mr BARNETT: Obviously the Premier will not table that document, so my question is to the Treasurer. Given the Premier’s failure yesterday to answer my question about the Government’s commitment to operating surpluses and the retention of the State’s AAA credit rating, I now ask - (1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
Mr BARNETT: Obviously the Premier will not table that document, so my question is to the Treasurer. Given the Premier’s failure yesterday to answer my question about the Government’s commitment to operating surpluses and the retention of the State’s AAA credit rating, I now ask - (1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
Given the Premier’s failure yesterday to answer my question about the Government’s commitment to operating surpluses and the retention of the State’s AAA credit rating, I now ask - (1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
(1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
(2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
(1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
Dr Gallop: You should talk to Hendy Cowan; he will tell you about it. You cannot talk to them, just like you cannot talk to the man next to you; that is your problem. Mr BARNETT: Obviously the Premier will not table that document, so my question is to the Treasurer. Given the Premier’s failure yesterday to answer my question about the Government’s commitment to operating surpluses and the retention of the State’s AAA credit rating, I now ask - (1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
Mr BARNETT: Obviously the Premier will not table that document, so my question is to the Treasurer. Given the Premier’s failure yesterday to answer my question about the Government’s commitment to operating surpluses and the retention of the State’s AAA credit rating, I now ask - (1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
Given the Premier’s failure yesterday to answer my question about the Government’s commitment to operating surpluses and the retention of the State’s AAA credit rating, I now ask - (1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
(1) Will the Government guarantee to retain a net operating surplus in the general government sector this financial year and for the remainder of this term of government? (2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
(2) Will he thereby guarantee to retain the State’s AAA credit rating during this term of government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
(1)-(2) What a hide the member opposite has to ask this sort of question! He was on the previous Government’s cabinet budget subcommittee, which produced operating deficits of $197.9 million in 1996-97, $263.5 million in 1997-98, $135 million in 1998-99 and $30.2 million in 1999-2000. That is the Leader of the Opposition’s record. On his watch for four financial years he delivered four deficits in a row. I listened to the Premier yesterday and I know that he answered that question. I will restate the position: This Government made a number of election commitments, including those related to financial management targets, and it intends to honour those commitments. Arrangements are in place through an expenditure review committee to control expenditure in government and to deliver on our financial management targets. Members opposite produced a situation in which our first advice from Treasury before we had even been sworn in was that the State’s AAA credit rating was at risk. Why was it at risk? It was at risk because members on the other side added $1 billion in operating expenditure to the budget from the time they brought down the budget last year to the time they announced the election. They made $1 billion worth of spending decisions in their last, desperate year. That is just operating expenditure; it does not include their capital commitments. They have no credibility at all on these matters. Actions speak louder than words.
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.