❓ Mr. Logan questions the Minister for Water about proposed water tariff increases. The Minister avoids directly answering, instead highlighting the Water Corporation's financial performance and capital works program under the current government, contrasting it with the previous Labor government's record.
AnsweredQoN 475Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
WATER
TARIFFS
475. Mr F.M. LOGAN to the Minister for Water:
I draw the minister's attention to the forthcoming
response by the Economic Regulation Authority's inquiry into water
costs and tariffs and the submission presented to this inquiry by the Water
Corporation.
(1) Does the
minister agree with the Water Corporation's suggested price path for
the average residential household, which promotes a further 25.5 per cent
increase in the cost of water over the next three years based on the weighted
average cost of capital of 6.2 per cent?
(2) Does the
minister agree with the Water Corporation's suggested state budget
price path put to the minister in the 2011–12 budget, which intends to
slug consumers a further 12.9 per cent for water over the next two years?
TARIFFS
475. Mr F.M. LOGAN to the Minister for Water:
I draw the minister's attention to the forthcoming
response by the Economic Regulation Authority's inquiry into water
costs and tariffs and the submission presented to this inquiry by the Water
Corporation.
(1) Does the
minister agree with the Water Corporation's suggested price path for
the average residential household, which promotes a further 25.5 per cent
increase in the cost of water over the next three years based on the weighted
average cost of capital of 6.2 per cent?
(2) Does the
minister agree with the Water Corporation's suggested state budget
price path put to the minister in the 2011–12 budget, which intends to
slug consumers a further 12.9 per cent for water over the next two years?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the
member for Cockburn for his question.
(1)–(2)
Specifically, the member asked the question on a day when we tabled the annual
report of the Water Corporation. I will get to the member's specific
question in a minute. I point out to the house that the revenue for the Water
Corporation for the last financial year was $2.1 billion. It had a surplus of
$527 million, a dividend of $396 million, and an operating subsidy of $450 million,
which meant there was a net accrual to government of $169 million. Let us look
at the performance of our government over the past four years compared with the
performance of the previous government. This is our capital works program.
Members will see that in the four years of this government's capital
program the lowest investment was in 2011–12 with $903 million and the
highest in the Labor government was $810 million. That is our capital program
for everyone to see. The lowest in Labor's term was $340 million. We
have a massive capital works program in the Water Corporation.
I turn to the operating subsidy.
The member for Cockburn is always going on the radio and saying that we are
wasting money in the Water Corporation and having higher profits. We deliver
some of the profits back to the consumer by delivering operating subsidies.
This chart shows the operating subsidies that the previous Labor government
delivered in its four years; that is the red columns. The blue columns are the
operating subsidies that this government has delivered in the past four years.
Last year, which is in the annual report, the operating subsidy was $450 million.
The Labor government's highest operating subsidy was $399 million. What
does that mean in terms of the net return to government? This chart shows the
net return from the Water Corporation to the Labor government in its four
years. If we add the difference between the blue and the red, it comes to half
a billion dollars.
I will go back to the specific
question. I have given a bit of context to the question. As everybody in this
house knows, the Economic Regulation Authority makes recommendations to the
government. We look at those recommendations and we then set the price.
member for Cockburn for his question.
(1)–(2)
Specifically, the member asked the question on a day when we tabled the annual
report of the Water Corporation. I will get to the member's specific
question in a minute. I point out to the house that the revenue for the Water
Corporation for the last financial year was $2.1 billion. It had a surplus of
$527 million, a dividend of $396 million, and an operating subsidy of $450 million,
which meant there was a net accrual to government of $169 million. Let us look
at the performance of our government over the past four years compared with the
performance of the previous government. This is our capital works program.
Members will see that in the four years of this government's capital
program the lowest investment was in 2011–12 with $903 million and the
highest in the Labor government was $810 million. That is our capital program
for everyone to see. The lowest in Labor's term was $340 million. We
have a massive capital works program in the Water Corporation.
I turn to the operating subsidy.
The member for Cockburn is always going on the radio and saying that we are
wasting money in the Water Corporation and having higher profits. We deliver
some of the profits back to the consumer by delivering operating subsidies.
This chart shows the operating subsidies that the previous Labor government
delivered in its four years; that is the red columns. The blue columns are the
operating subsidies that this government has delivered in the past four years.
Last year, which is in the annual report, the operating subsidy was $450 million.
The Labor government's highest operating subsidy was $399 million. What
does that mean in terms of the net return to government? This chart shows the
net return from the Water Corporation to the Labor government in its four
years. If we add the difference between the blue and the red, it comes to half
a billion dollars.
I will go back to the specific
question. I have given a bit of context to the question. As everybody in this
house knows, the Economic Regulation Authority makes recommendations to the
government. We look at those recommendations and we then set the price.
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.