❓ Question regarding Police Minister's correspondence with the Treasurer about potential budget cuts to the police car fleet. The Minister confirms the correspondence and outlines the discussion, but declines to table the letter.
AnsweredQoN 684Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
MINISTER FOR POLICE — CORRESPONDENCE TO TREASURER
I refer to the recent reference in the media to the minister having written to the Treasurer and to the minister’s comments expressing his concerns about the impact on Western Australian policing operations of a cut to its car fleet. (1) Can the minister confirm that he wrote such a letter? (2) What was the nature of his concerns? (3) Has he received a response from the Treasurer? (4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON
I refer to the recent reference in the media to the minister having written to the Treasurer and to the minister’s comments expressing his concerns about the impact on Western Australian policing operations of a cut to its car fleet. (1) Can the minister confirm that he wrote such a letter? (2) What was the nature of his concerns? (3) Has he received a response from the Treasurer? (4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON
AnswerView source ↗
And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(1) Can the minister confirm that he wrote such a letter? (2) What was the nature of his concerns? (3) Has he received a response from the Treasurer? (4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(2) What was the nature of his concerns? (3) Has he received a response from the Treasurer? (4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(3) Has he received a response from the Treasurer? (4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(1) Can the minister confirm that he wrote such a letter? (2) What was the nature of his concerns? (3) Has he received a response from the Treasurer? (4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(2) What was the nature of his concerns? (3) Has he received a response from the Treasurer? (4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(3) Has he received a response from the Treasurer? (4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(4) What did the Treasurer say? (5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(5) Is the minister prepared to table that correspondence today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON replied: And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
And what did he have for breakfast yesterday morning? The member wants to know all sorts of things. Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr W.J. Johnston interjected. Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Ms M.M. Quirk : What were your concerns, minister? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I will answer the member’s question if the bloke up the back would keep quiet for a little while. I would appreciate that because he really does annoy me. He has a name very similar to mine but he really does annoy me. I would hate people to think he is a relative of mine. Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr E.S. Ripper : He might be your nephew. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not think so. I would not have a nephew like that in a fit. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
The SPEAKER : It is question time. I know that sometimes we do not always get the answers we want. Minister, I urge you to get to the question asked by the member for Girrawheen. I would also ask other members in this place to remain quiet during the initial part of the answer. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I am endeavouring to answer the member for Girrawheen’s questions but I am getting bombarded by members opposite. (1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
(1)-(5) I will give the member for Girrawheen the best answer I can. It will be a truthful one. She asked about six questions in one but I will try to go through them. Did I write to the Treasurer in relation to media speculation about the car fleet? Yes, I did. I pointed out to the Treasurer that it is very difficult to meet that sort of budget. The initial budget that I thought we were looking for related to a reduction in vehicles. Predominantly, the vehicles are front-line police vehicles, and I explained to the Treasurer that that could not happen. The Treasurer and I talk quite regularly, and we talked on this occasion. The Treasurer said to me, “Rob”—that is what he said. In fact, he might have said, “My good friend Rob.” He might have done that; I cannot remember exactly. He said that we are not necessarily looking at trying to make savings in the number of vehicles; it is the cost of those vehicles—the overall cost to government. I spoke with police, obviously — Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : We get on pretty well. We do not do too badly. What the government and what the Treasurer were looking at was basically some savings, if possible, in that area. Of course, savings can be achieved on some of the leasing costs. The vehicles that are not front-line ones do not need to be six or eight-cylinder vehicles. They can be smaller vehicles with better fuel consumption—all those sorts of things. That is an area that the police are looking at. I was quite pleased that the Treasurer told me that, because it helped me no end. As in every government department, there are some vehicles that cannot be classed as front-line service vehicles but can be classed as vehicles that might be used in other areas, and there could be some savings in that area. There could be some pooled car service savings, and that is something that the police are looking at. Certainly, in that area we are looking at that. I think that answers about three of the member’s questions. What were the other ones? Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Ms M.M. Quirk : Whether the minister will table the correspondence—both the letters. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I do not see why I should table correspondence between me and the Treasurer. It is something that the opposition would never do when it was in government. Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Ms M.M. Quirk : We’ll just FOI it then. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : If the member wants to put in a freedom of information application, she can do so. The opposition FOIs everything else. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : No, I am not refusing to table it. I am simply saying that I do not believe it is appropriate for me to table it, because I am following the — Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr M. McGowan : Did you actually write a letter? Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : Of course I wrote a letter. Does the member think I am not telling the truth or something? For goodness sake! I find it extremely insulting that that inference should be made. I have written to the Treasurer. I am pretty sure I have had a response in writing, but I am not certain. However, most importantly, we have had several discussions since that time, and I am happy, and he is happy, that we are working towards the same end. I think that was the last question, was it not? Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
Ms M.M. Quirk : Yes.
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.