❓ Opposition Leader McGowan questions Premier Barnett about the state budget deficit, attributing it to past spending decisions. The Premier deflects, blaming GST revenue decline and falling iron ore prices, while defending infrastructure projects.
AnsweredQoN 290Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
STATE BUDGET 2015–16 — OPERATING
DEFICIT
290. Mr M. McGOWAN to the Premier:
I refer to the Premier's comments yesterday —
The
point I made yesterday, which I stand by today, is that no matter what
decisions had been taken in previous years, the state government would be on an
operating deficit for this year.
(1) How can the Premier claim that previous
spending decisions that add to recurrent expenditure do not have any impact on
future budgets?
(2) If the Premier had been running big
enough surpluses rather than spending all revenue growth, would that not have
provided for a buffer when revenue dropped?
(3) Could a deficit have not been avoided or
been significantly smaller had the Premier managed the finances better over
past years?
DEFICIT
290. Mr M. McGOWAN to the Premier:
I refer to the Premier's comments yesterday —
The
point I made yesterday, which I stand by today, is that no matter what
decisions had been taken in previous years, the state government would be on an
operating deficit for this year.
(1) How can the Premier claim that previous
spending decisions that add to recurrent expenditure do not have any impact on
future budgets?
(2) If the Premier had been running big
enough surpluses rather than spending all revenue growth, would that not have
provided for a buffer when revenue dropped?
(3) Could a deficit have not been avoided or
been significantly smaller had the Premier managed the finances better over
past years?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3) I will not give the Leader of
the Opposition an economics 101 lecture, although I could take the Leader of
the Opposition right through the three-month course word for word right now—if
he wants to sit there for three months! Every question that the Leader of the
Opposition asks commences with, ''You said on ...'' It could be 9
September or 4 July! I am glad his life is so dull that he simply looks at
everything I say or do. Get out more; have a bit more fun! The point I made,
and I think everyone in Western Australia, maybe with the exception of Leader
of the Opposition, understood what I was saying: if the federal government,
through the GST arrangements, is taking $3.7 billion off Western Australia, if
iron ore prices have fallen from $160 a tonne to around $50 or less a tonne,
there is no circumstance under which this state could avoid a deficit.
The
Leader of the Opposition could have said that we should have decided not to
build the Children's Hospital. We could have done that. We could have
decided not to build Fiona Stanley Hospital. We could have decided not to build
Perth Stadium; we have not paid for that as that is progressing. Is that what
the Leader of the Opposition thinks? We could have decided not to build
Elizabeth Quay.
Several members interjected.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : This is good! We could have decided not to
build country hospitals or new high schools, including in opposition
electorates. We could have decided all those things. Is that the opposition's
policy? Do not do anything! What a great policy that is—do not do
anything! In a hypothetical situation, because this is the world the Leader of
the Opposition lives in, even if we had not done all of those things—let
us assume we had not done them and we had done nothing like the Labor
government—would we be in surplus or deficit this year?
Dr M.D. Nahan : We'd be in deficit.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : We would be in deficit. That is the point I
make. Thank you, Treasurer. I could do economics 101 and the Treasurer could do
economics 201; we could stay here for six months and go through it. If we had
done none of those things, we would still be in deficit for this financial
year. Had we put money away, yes, we could have had a lower level of debt. The
point I was making is that the opposition can criticise this government on the
level —
Several members interjected.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : Listen, listen! Listen to what I said
yesterday.
Several members interjected.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : The opposition can criticise the government
if it wishes on the level of debt, and that is what I acknowledged to the media
yesterday, but the opposition cannot criticise the government on the deficit
incurred this year, because there is no circumstance at all under which that
could have been avoided.
the Opposition an economics 101 lecture, although I could take the Leader of
the Opposition right through the three-month course word for word right now—if
he wants to sit there for three months! Every question that the Leader of the
Opposition asks commences with, ''You said on ...'' It could be 9
September or 4 July! I am glad his life is so dull that he simply looks at
everything I say or do. Get out more; have a bit more fun! The point I made,
and I think everyone in Western Australia, maybe with the exception of Leader
of the Opposition, understood what I was saying: if the federal government,
through the GST arrangements, is taking $3.7 billion off Western Australia, if
iron ore prices have fallen from $160 a tonne to around $50 or less a tonne,
there is no circumstance under which this state could avoid a deficit.
The
Leader of the Opposition could have said that we should have decided not to
build the Children's Hospital. We could have done that. We could have
decided not to build Fiona Stanley Hospital. We could have decided not to build
Perth Stadium; we have not paid for that as that is progressing. Is that what
the Leader of the Opposition thinks? We could have decided not to build
Elizabeth Quay.
Several members interjected.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : This is good! We could have decided not to
build country hospitals or new high schools, including in opposition
electorates. We could have decided all those things. Is that the opposition's
policy? Do not do anything! What a great policy that is—do not do
anything! In a hypothetical situation, because this is the world the Leader of
the Opposition lives in, even if we had not done all of those things—let
us assume we had not done them and we had done nothing like the Labor
government—would we be in surplus or deficit this year?
Dr M.D. Nahan : We'd be in deficit.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : We would be in deficit. That is the point I
make. Thank you, Treasurer. I could do economics 101 and the Treasurer could do
economics 201; we could stay here for six months and go through it. If we had
done none of those things, we would still be in deficit for this financial
year. Had we put money away, yes, we could have had a lower level of debt. The
point I was making is that the opposition can criticise this government on the
level —
Several members interjected.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : Listen, listen! Listen to what I said
yesterday.
Several members interjected.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : The opposition can criticise the government
if it wishes on the level of debt, and that is what I acknowledged to the media
yesterday, but the opposition cannot criticise the government on the deficit
incurred this year, because there is no circumstance at all under which that
could have been avoided.
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.