A WA parliamentary question seeks details on the Water Corporation's infill sewerage program expenditure and net debt, comparing past spending with pre-election plans and current estimates. The response provides specific figures for each requested year.

AnsweredQoN 755Legislative Council
Asked
14 November 2001
Portfolio
Government Enterprises

QuestionView source ↗

(1) How much did the Water Corporation spend on the infill sewerage program for each of the four years 1997-98 to 2000-01? (2) What was the planned expenditure pre-election for the infill sewerage program for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? (3) What are the current estimates of expenditure for the infill sewerage program for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? (4) What is the Water Corporation’s current estimate of its net debt position for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? Hon N.D. GRIFFITHS

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 1997-98, $80.1 million; 1998-99, $96.3 million; 1999-2000, $87.2 million; 2000-01, $86.9 million. All figures are in actual dollars. (2) 2001-02, $91.6 million; 2002-03, $89.9 million; 2003-04, $85 million; 2004-05, $55.5 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
(2) What was the planned expenditure pre-election for the infill sewerage program for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? (3) What are the current estimates of expenditure for the infill sewerage program for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? (4) What is the Water Corporation’s current estimate of its net debt position for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? Hon N.D. GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 1997-98, $80.1 million; 1998-99, $96.3 million; 1999-2000, $87.2 million; 2000-01, $86.9 million. All figures are in actual dollars. (2) 2001-02, $91.6 million; 2002-03, $89.9 million; 2003-04, $85 million; 2004-05, $55.5 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
(3) What are the current estimates of expenditure for the infill sewerage program for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? (4) What is the Water Corporation’s current estimate of its net debt position for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? Hon N.D. GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 1997-98, $80.1 million; 1998-99, $96.3 million; 1999-2000, $87.2 million; 2000-01, $86.9 million. All figures are in actual dollars. (2) 2001-02, $91.6 million; 2002-03, $89.9 million; 2003-04, $85 million; 2004-05, $55.5 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
(4) What is the Water Corporation’s current estimate of its net debt position for each of the four years from 2001-02 to 2004-05? Hon N.D. GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 1997-98, $80.1 million; 1998-99, $96.3 million; 1999-2000, $87.2 million; 2000-01, $86.9 million. All figures are in actual dollars. (2) 2001-02, $91.6 million; 2002-03, $89.9 million; 2003-04, $85 million; 2004-05, $55.5 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
Hon N.D. GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 1997-98, $80.1 million; 1998-99, $96.3 million; 1999-2000, $87.2 million; 2000-01, $86.9 million. All figures are in actual dollars. (2) 2001-02, $91.6 million; 2002-03, $89.9 million; 2003-04, $85 million; 2004-05, $55.5 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) 1997-98, $80.1 million; 1998-99, $96.3 million; 1999-2000, $87.2 million; 2000-01, $86.9 million. All figures are in actual dollars. (2) 2001-02, $91.6 million; 2002-03, $89.9 million; 2003-04, $85 million; 2004-05, $55.5 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
(1) 1997-98, $80.1 million; 1998-99, $96.3 million; 1999-2000, $87.2 million; 2000-01, $86.9 million. All figures are in actual dollars. (2) 2001-02, $91.6 million; 2002-03, $89.9 million; 2003-04, $85 million; 2004-05, $55.5 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
(2) 2001-02, $91.6 million; 2002-03, $89.9 million; 2003-04, $85 million; 2004-05, $55.5 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
(3) 2001-02, $50.8 million; 2002-03, $31.5 million; 2003-04, $34.3 million; 2004-05, $38 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. (4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
(4) 2001-02, $1 035 million; 2002-03, $1 090 million; 2003-04, $1 151 million; 2004-05, $1 121 million. All figures in December 2001 dollars. The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.
The Leader of the Opposition was about to ask me a question. I now have a true copy of the answer.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more