❓ Opposition questions the Minister on the housing indemnity insurance crisis, particularly regarding small builders. The Minister acknowledges the problem, refutes claims of bailing out big builders, and seeks opposition support for legislation to establish a mutual fund.
AnsweredQoN 169Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the public protests across the State yesterday by builders, subcontractors and building suppliers who are totally frustrated by the Government’s lack of action in solving the housing indemnity insurance crisis. (1) Is the minister aware that many builders are still suffering, such as A. di Bucci and Son of Noranda, who has been in the profession for 40 years, but who recently lost two contracts worth $2 million because he can no longer obtain adequate housing indemnity insurance? (2) As it is nearly five months since the minister bailed out the big three builders in this State by underwriting their housing insurance needs, when will he help A. di Bucci and Son and all the other small and regional builders? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
(1) Is the minister aware that many builders are still suffering, such as A. di Bucci and Son of Noranda, who has been in the profession for 40 years, but who recently lost two contracts worth $2 million because he can no longer obtain adequate housing indemnity insurance? (2) As it is nearly five months since the minister bailed out the big three builders in this State by underwriting their housing insurance needs, when will he help A. di Bucci and Son and all the other small and regional builders? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
(2) As it is nearly five months since the minister bailed out the big three builders in this State by underwriting their housing insurance needs, when will he help A. di Bucci and Son and all the other small and regional builders? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
(1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June.
Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June.
In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
(1) Is the minister aware that many builders are still suffering, such as A. di Bucci and Son of Noranda, who has been in the profession for 40 years, but who recently lost two contracts worth $2 million because he can no longer obtain adequate housing indemnity insurance? (2) As it is nearly five months since the minister bailed out the big three builders in this State by underwriting their housing insurance needs, when will he help A. di Bucci and Son and all the other small and regional builders? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
(2) As it is nearly five months since the minister bailed out the big three builders in this State by underwriting their housing insurance needs, when will he help A. di Bucci and Son and all the other small and regional builders? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
(1)-(2) The member has raised a very important matter. It is a pity that he has created a twisted view by including assertions in his question that detract from a matter that is causing concern to builders and the Government. The problem is affecting builders across the whole of Australia. A report compiled by the federal Government indicated that most States are experiencing similar problems, which must be addressed. We are addressing those problems. It was interesting to talk to some of the members on this side of the House who saw the protesters at their offices. A reasonable number turned up, but the “public” seemed to have involvement from members of the Liberal Party. In some places, a number of Liberal members were vying with the number of builders. The Liberal Party would do better to tell the truth on this matter and work with builders to resolve it rather than turn it into a political football. Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Where is that mutual fund legislation? I cannot see it. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Some builders are still suffering, although the Leader of the Opposition has called it a majority. There are two competing groups. The Housing Industry Association says indemnity insurance is not a problem, but the Master Builders Association of Western Australia says it is. I accept there is a problem, but the size of the problem is somewhere in between the level those bodies have described. Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June.
Many builders have said that they can get the insurance they want. Unfortunately, only one major insurer exists. It is not a competitive insurance market and it does not provide a good level of insurance or service for the builders. Many builders are bearing the brunt of that monopoly. In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June.
In his question, the member suggested that the Government bailed out big builders. It did no such thing. Had we not given an undertaking, as was provided in New South Wales and Victoria, to pick up a claim that amounted to $10 million, insurance would have been withdrawn from the market due to the difficulty of obtaining reinsurance. If we had not done that, there would have been no insurance at all; insurers would have withdrawn from the market. The Government stepped in to maintain the level of insurance, although we accept it is inadequate. One of the many things the Government has done is introduce legislation to allow the establishment of a mutual fund to provide some competition. Hopefully, through that competition in the insurance market, there will be a better level of service. Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition help the Government expedite a reply to the message on the Notice Paper, so that the upper House can deal with the amendment Bill that this House passed in June.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: There is a message on the Notice Paper. Will the Opposition assist us in expediting a return message? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do our best to get that legislation through this Parliament in a valid, proper and quick way. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition assist us - Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Several members interjected. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We have already told the industry that we are more than happy to help in any way to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. However, as the minister knows, it will take several months to get the fund up and running. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for that undertaking. Does the undertaking extend as far as expediting a message to the other place today in response to the message in government order of the day No 3 on the Notice Paper? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will do whatever we can to ensure the mutual fund is implemented as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Will the Opposition do that by assisting us today to return a message in response to order of the day No 3? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: We will talk about the detail later. We will do everything we can to get the mutual fund up and running as quickly as possible. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Mr Speaker, I will draw my answer to a conclusion. However, the point from that exchange, which was quite valuable, is that the acid test is now with the Opposition. Is it now playing with small builders? We have seen plenty of examples so far of the Opposition’s simply playing with small builders and not telling them the truth. The acid test is whether the Opposition will assist us to expedite a message from this Chamber to the other place today so that we can move with that legislation without further delay? By the end of today, we shall know whether the Liberal Opposition will support small business or simply play games with it.
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.