❓ A parliamentary question regarding the timing of salinity funding in the WA budget, following the intergovernmental agreement. The Treasurer clarifies the budget process and assures transparency.
AnsweredQoN 1051Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the announcement by the Premier that he has signed the intergovernmental agreement on the national action plan for salinity and water quality. (1) In today’s Countryman newspaper the Minister for Agriculture is reported to have said that salinity money has been put aside but will not be included in the budget until after the intergovernmental agreement on the national action plan on salinity and water quality is signed. Can the Treasurer explain the statement? (2) Does the State run two sets of books, given that cabinet ministers are saying that money can magically appear now that the agreement is signed? (3) How does this method of managing the State’s finances deliver the Labor Party’s election promise of a supposed open and transparent Government? Mr RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
(1) In today’s Countryman newspaper the Minister for Agriculture is reported to have said that salinity money has been put aside but will not be included in the budget until after the intergovernmental agreement on the national action plan on salinity and water quality is signed. Can the Treasurer explain the statement? (2) Does the State run two sets of books, given that cabinet ministers are saying that money can magically appear now that the agreement is signed? (3) How does this method of managing the State’s finances deliver the Labor Party’s election promise of a supposed open and transparent Government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
(2) Does the State run two sets of books, given that cabinet ministers are saying that money can magically appear now that the agreement is signed? (3) How does this method of managing the State’s finances deliver the Labor Party’s election promise of a supposed open and transparent Government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
(3) How does this method of managing the State’s finances deliver the Labor Party’s election promise of a supposed open and transparent Government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
(1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition.
Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
(1) In today’s Countryman newspaper the Minister for Agriculture is reported to have said that salinity money has been put aside but will not be included in the budget until after the intergovernmental agreement on the national action plan on salinity and water quality is signed. Can the Treasurer explain the statement? (2) Does the State run two sets of books, given that cabinet ministers are saying that money can magically appear now that the agreement is signed? (3) How does this method of managing the State’s finances deliver the Labor Party’s election promise of a supposed open and transparent Government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
(2) Does the State run two sets of books, given that cabinet ministers are saying that money can magically appear now that the agreement is signed? (3) How does this method of managing the State’s finances deliver the Labor Party’s election promise of a supposed open and transparent Government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
(3) How does this method of managing the State’s finances deliver the Labor Party’s election promise of a supposed open and transparent Government? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
(1)-(3) It is interesting to be asked a question that relates to an announcement by the Premier and a comment by the Minister for Agriculture. Somehow or other the member wants me to deal with those two issues. There is a budget cut-off date. By law, the Treasurer advises the Under Treasurer of that date. All decisions made prior to that date are included in the budget papers. As the process of government goes on, both savings and spending decisions are made after the cut-off date. They are then discussed and analysed in the midyear review. That is the process. I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Barnett: Rothwells. Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
I understand that the salinity funding is in the budget. In other words, the decisions to provide for the funding were made prior to the cut-off date. However, the agreement with the Commonwealth is a long-term agreement that takes us past the forward estimates period. Therefore, not all the funding is in the budget and the four-year plan, because the duration of the national action plan takes us beyond the forward estimates. The member for Roe can be assured that no funny-money arrangement is involved; it is real money and the process is open and accountable. We do not have arrangements such as those the Under Treasurer complained about in relation to the Leader of the Opposition.
Mr RIPPER: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to keep complaining about that, perhaps I can put the memo on the web site so that the public can read it and judge for themselves. The member for Roe can be assured that the money is there. If the decision was made after the budget cut-off date, it will be revealed in the midyear review.
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.