❓ Mr. Buswell questions the Treasurer about credit cards held by ministerial staff, their limits, audit procedures, and potential misuse. The Treasurer deflects, highlighting FOI as a control and not directly answering all questions.
AnsweredQoN 423Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
CREDIT CARDS - MINISTERIAL STAFF
I refer to recent information provided by the Department of the Premier and Cabinet that shows that the government’s politically appointed ministerial staff now carry credit cards with a combined limit of $1 million. (1) Why do politically appointed ministerial staff need credit cards with a limit of $1 million? (2) What audit procedures are in place to ensure this excessive credit is not misused? (3) Have there been any cases recorded of the misuse of these facilities since 2001; if so, will the Treasurer undertake to table the details of these incidents? (4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER
I refer to recent information provided by the Department of the Premier and Cabinet that shows that the government’s politically appointed ministerial staff now carry credit cards with a combined limit of $1 million. (1) Why do politically appointed ministerial staff need credit cards with a limit of $1 million? (2) What audit procedures are in place to ensure this excessive credit is not misused? (3) Have there been any cases recorded of the misuse of these facilities since 2001; if so, will the Treasurer undertake to table the details of these incidents? (4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(1) Why do politically appointed ministerial staff need credit cards with a limit of $1 million? (2) What audit procedures are in place to ensure this excessive credit is not misused? (3) Have there been any cases recorded of the misuse of these facilities since 2001; if so, will the Treasurer undertake to table the details of these incidents? (4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(2) What audit procedures are in place to ensure this excessive credit is not misused? (3) Have there been any cases recorded of the misuse of these facilities since 2001; if so, will the Treasurer undertake to table the details of these incidents? (4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(3) Have there been any cases recorded of the misuse of these facilities since 2001; if so, will the Treasurer undertake to table the details of these incidents? (4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(1) Why do politically appointed ministerial staff need credit cards with a limit of $1 million? (2) What audit procedures are in place to ensure this excessive credit is not misused? (3) Have there been any cases recorded of the misuse of these facilities since 2001; if so, will the Treasurer undertake to table the details of these incidents? (4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(2) What audit procedures are in place to ensure this excessive credit is not misused? (3) Have there been any cases recorded of the misuse of these facilities since 2001; if so, will the Treasurer undertake to table the details of these incidents? (4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(3) Have there been any cases recorded of the misuse of these facilities since 2001; if so, will the Treasurer undertake to table the details of these incidents? (4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(4) Will the Treasurer table the details of expenditure on these ministerial adviser credit cards, including the merchants, for the past two years; if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
(1)-(4) I feel especially privileged this question time because I believe that this is the first question asked of me by the shadow Treasurer since before the budget. It is a red-letter day! At last the shadow Treasurer has asked me a question. The shadow Treasurer has been applying his less with less approach to his questions. His approach has been less questions, less impact. My understanding is that a credit card is one of the more accountable authorities for expenditure because the paper trail for credit card expenditure - according to the advice I have received - is very transparent. It is not the case that ministers’ staff will use the limit they have been allocated. It is the case that if they use those credit cards for official purposes - they are entitled to use them only for official purposes - there will be a transparent and accountable paper trail. That transparent and accountable paper trail is very often investigated by people who make freedom of information applications. Anyone who has been in government for any period and who carries a credit card for official purposes knows that every now and again credit card records are subject to freedom of information applications. The entire details of people’s expenditure for official purposes can be revealed. There is no problem with accountability there. On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
On the question of whether there have been any cases of the misuse of credit cards issued in ministerial offices, I am personally not aware of any cases. I can seek advice on that issue. On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
On the question of accountability, credit cards provide much better accountability than many other mechanisms. They are subject to FOI; indeed, that facility is available to the member for Vasse.
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.