❓ Mr Redman questions the Treasurer's reluctance to hold a parliamentary inquiry into state agreements, accusing the government of hypocrisy regarding unilateral changes. The Treasurer defends the government's position, criticising the Nationals' past actions and questioning their motives.
AnsweredQoN 380Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
STATE AGREEMENT ACTS —
AMENDMENTS
380. Mr D.T. REDMAN to the Treasurer:
I have a supplementary question.
Given the Treasurer's government has backflipped and is now open to
unilaterally changing state agreements, why is the Treasurer so afraid of an
open and transparent parliamentary inquiry into legacy state agreements to
ensure that the taxpayer is still receiving a fair deal?
AMENDMENTS
380. Mr D.T. REDMAN to the Treasurer:
I have a supplementary question.
Given the Treasurer's government has backflipped and is now open to
unilaterally changing state agreements, why is the Treasurer so afraid of an
open and transparent parliamentary inquiry into legacy state agreements to
ensure that the taxpayer is still receiving a fair deal?
AnswerView source ↗
As I said, we do what we can to
protect the investment of capital in Western Australia, particularly when that
investment is in the billions of dollars over multiple years and creates
thousands of Western Australian jobs. We will not do what the Nationals WA did
at the fag end of a government and suddenly decide to say, ''You know
what? It's time to destroy jobs and unilaterally change the terms upon
which people invest.'' That is the fundamental difference, which is what
the National Party wanted to do and to date I hope the Liberal Party has still
held out on that position. We do not change the terms upon which that
investment was made, and ultimately, the paucity of the argument around an
investigation into state agreements is highlighted by the fact that two Nationals
sitting on the front bench spent, I think, the better part of the last eight
and a half years sitting in cabinet. The
fact that not once did they consider doing that highlights the reality around
whether they need that done.
protect the investment of capital in Western Australia, particularly when that
investment is in the billions of dollars over multiple years and creates
thousands of Western Australian jobs. We will not do what the Nationals WA did
at the fag end of a government and suddenly decide to say, ''You know
what? It's time to destroy jobs and unilaterally change the terms upon
which people invest.'' That is the fundamental difference, which is what
the National Party wanted to do and to date I hope the Liberal Party has still
held out on that position. We do not change the terms upon which that
investment was made, and ultimately, the paucity of the argument around an
investigation into state agreements is highlighted by the fact that two Nationals
sitting on the front bench spent, I think, the better part of the last eight
and a half years sitting in cabinet. The
fact that not once did they consider doing that highlights the reality around
whether they need that done.
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.