❓ Premier Gallop refutes a claim in The West Australian about not applying for Water Smart Australia funds, criticizes the Prime Minister's water policy, and defends WA's position on the National Water Initiative, highlighting potential costs to farmers and advocating for fair treatment for WA.
AnsweredQoN 547Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Does the Premier stand by his comment in today’s The West Australian that he will not apply for any of the $1.6 billion Water Smart Australia program funds and will instead fund projects through increased water charges? Dr G.I. GALLOP
AnswerView source ↗
The member for Merredin should not believe what he reads in The West Australian . I will quote from the statement put out by the Prime Minister when he announced the national water fund - State and Territory Governments who are party to the National Water Initiative Agreements will be eligible to seek funding under the Fund. As far as I know, we have not signed the National Water Initiative. We would not be eligible to apply. It is extraordinary that we now have a statement from the national Government that we can apply. The statement states that we cannot but we are now told that we can. We need some clarification from the Prime Minister. Let me go to the heart of this issue. The Western Australian Government put a very clear position to the Commonwealth Government at the most recent Premiers’ meeting. The position was quite simple: the Australian continent does not come to an end at the Nullarbor Plain. To the west of the Nullarbor Plain is the State of Western Australia. We expect that the issues in this State should be given equal treatment to the issues relating to the Murray-Darling Basin. That was the position I put. The second point is one that I made earlier today. What sort of a position is it when the Prime Minister robs - I use the word very carefully - the States of money that they are already receiving and then says that the money will be given back? As far as I know there are no gains in that for Western Australia because he is taking with one hand and is offering to give back money without any guarantees with the other. This is a very bad policy that the Prime Minister has put forward. It is one of the very important reasons we need to have a Latham Labor Government after 9 October. After that election we will look at all the commonwealth programs that may still exist. Should any of those programs, including the water programs, be in the interests of this State, we will be involved. I love the attitude of the Opposition on this. If we were to sign the National Water Initiative, we would have to find $130 million of Western Australian money. All the farmers listening need to know the second point because they have not been told by Mr Anderson. If Western Australia signs the National Water Initiative, the people around this State will have to pay the full cost of the water. If we were to sign that agreement, there would have to be something in it for the people of Western Australia. However, there is not. I represent the people of Western Australia. As far as I am concerned, we should unite in sending a clear message to John Howard that he cannot rob the States and then offer the money back. We cannot have a National Water Initiative that does not take into account the interests of Western Australia. A written agreement that policies will not be changed without consultation cannot be broken. I will continue to advocate for the interests of Western Australia and demand that the Prime Minister honour his agreements. Very importantly, we will keep pursuing our policies of water reform and water initiatives in Western Australia, which is what we have been doing since we were elected in 2001.
Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: The member for Merredin should not believe what he reads in The West Australian . I will quote from the statement put out by the Prime Minister when he announced the national water fund - State and Territory Governments who are party to the National Water Initiative Agreements will be eligible to seek funding under the Fund. As far as I know, we have not signed the National Water Initiative. We would not be eligible to apply. It is extraordinary that we now have a statement from the national Government that we can apply. The statement states that we cannot but we are now told that we can. We need some clarification from the Prime Minister. Let me go to the heart of this issue. The Western Australian Government put a very clear position to the Commonwealth Government at the most recent Premiers’ meeting. The position was quite simple: the Australian continent does not come to an end at the Nullarbor Plain. To the west of the Nullarbor Plain is the State of Western Australia. We expect that the issues in this State should be given equal treatment to the issues relating to the Murray-Darling Basin. That was the position I put. The second point is one that I made earlier today. What sort of a position is it when the Prime Minister robs - I use the word very carefully - the States of money that they are already receiving and then says that the money will be given back? As far as I know there are no gains in that for Western Australia because he is taking with one hand and is offering to give back money without any guarantees with the other. This is a very bad policy that the Prime Minister has put forward. It is one of the very important reasons we need to have a Latham Labor Government after 9 October. After that election we will look at all the commonwealth programs that may still exist. Should any of those programs, including the water programs, be in the interests of this State, we will be involved. I love the attitude of the Opposition on this. If we were to sign the National Water Initiative, we would have to find $130 million of Western Australian money. All the farmers listening need to know the second point because they have not been told by Mr Anderson. If Western Australia signs the National Water Initiative, the people around this State will have to pay the full cost of the water. If we were to sign that agreement, there would have to be something in it for the people of Western Australia. However, there is not. I represent the people of Western Australia. As far as I am concerned, we should unite in sending a clear message to John Howard that he cannot rob the States and then offer the money back. We cannot have a National Water Initiative that does not take into account the interests of Western Australia. A written agreement that policies will not be changed without consultation cannot be broken. I will continue to advocate for the interests of Western Australia and demand that the Prime Minister honour his agreements. Very importantly, we will keep pursuing our policies of water reform and water initiatives in Western Australia, which is what we have been doing since we were elected in 2001.
The member for Merredin should not believe what he reads in The West Australian . I will quote from the statement put out by the Prime Minister when he announced the national water fund - State and Territory Governments who are party to the National Water Initiative Agreements will be eligible to seek funding under the Fund. As far as I know, we have not signed the National Water Initiative. We would not be eligible to apply. It is extraordinary that we now have a statement from the national Government that we can apply. The statement states that we cannot but we are now told that we can. We need some clarification from the Prime Minister. Let me go to the heart of this issue. The Western Australian Government put a very clear position to the Commonwealth Government at the most recent Premiers’ meeting. The position was quite simple: the Australian continent does not come to an end at the Nullarbor Plain. To the west of the Nullarbor Plain is the State of Western Australia. We expect that the issues in this State should be given equal treatment to the issues relating to the Murray-Darling Basin. That was the position I put. The second point is one that I made earlier today. What sort of a position is it when the Prime Minister robs - I use the word very carefully - the States of money that they are already receiving and then says that the money will be given back? As far as I know there are no gains in that for Western Australia because he is taking with one hand and is offering to give back money without any guarantees with the other. This is a very bad policy that the Prime Minister has put forward. It is one of the very important reasons we need to have a Latham Labor Government after 9 October. After that election we will look at all the commonwealth programs that may still exist. Should any of those programs, including the water programs, be in the interests of this State, we will be involved. I love the attitude of the Opposition on this. If we were to sign the National Water Initiative, we would have to find $130 million of Western Australian money. All the farmers listening need to know the second point because they have not been told by Mr Anderson. If Western Australia signs the National Water Initiative, the people around this State will have to pay the full cost of the water. If we were to sign that agreement, there would have to be something in it for the people of Western Australia. However, there is not. I represent the people of Western Australia. As far as I am concerned, we should unite in sending a clear message to John Howard that he cannot rob the States and then offer the money back. We cannot have a National Water Initiative that does not take into account the interests of Western Australia. A written agreement that policies will not be changed without consultation cannot be broken. I will continue to advocate for the interests of Western Australia and demand that the Prime Minister honour his agreements. Very importantly, we will keep pursuing our policies of water reform and water initiatives in Western Australia, which is what we have been doing since we were elected in 2001.
Let me go to the heart of this issue. The Western Australian Government put a very clear position to the Commonwealth Government at the most recent Premiers’ meeting. The position was quite simple: the Australian continent does not come to an end at the Nullarbor Plain. To the west of the Nullarbor Plain is the State of Western Australia. We expect that the issues in this State should be given equal treatment to the issues relating to the Murray-Darling Basin. That was the position I put. The second point is one that I made earlier today. What sort of a position is it when the Prime Minister robs - I use the word very carefully - the States of money that they are already receiving and then says that the money will be given back? As far as I know there are no gains in that for Western Australia because he is taking with one hand and is offering to give back money without any guarantees with the other. This is a very bad policy that the Prime Minister has put forward. It is one of the very important reasons we need to have a Latham Labor Government after 9 October. After that election we will look at all the commonwealth programs that may still exist. Should any of those programs, including the water programs, be in the interests of this State, we will be involved. I love the attitude of the Opposition on this. If we were to sign the National Water Initiative, we would have to find $130 million of Western Australian money. All the farmers listening need to know the second point because they have not been told by Mr Anderson. If Western Australia signs the National Water Initiative, the people around this State will have to pay the full cost of the water. If we were to sign that agreement, there would have to be something in it for the people of Western Australia. However, there is not. I represent the people of Western Australia. As far as I am concerned, we should unite in sending a clear message to John Howard that he cannot rob the States and then offer the money back. We cannot have a National Water Initiative that does not take into account the interests of Western Australia. A written agreement that policies will not be changed without consultation cannot be broken. I will continue to advocate for the interests of Western Australia and demand that the Prime Minister honour his agreements. Very importantly, we will keep pursuing our policies of water reform and water initiatives in Western Australia, which is what we have been doing since we were elected in 2001.
Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: The member for Merredin should not believe what he reads in The West Australian . I will quote from the statement put out by the Prime Minister when he announced the national water fund - State and Territory Governments who are party to the National Water Initiative Agreements will be eligible to seek funding under the Fund. As far as I know, we have not signed the National Water Initiative. We would not be eligible to apply. It is extraordinary that we now have a statement from the national Government that we can apply. The statement states that we cannot but we are now told that we can. We need some clarification from the Prime Minister. Let me go to the heart of this issue. The Western Australian Government put a very clear position to the Commonwealth Government at the most recent Premiers’ meeting. The position was quite simple: the Australian continent does not come to an end at the Nullarbor Plain. To the west of the Nullarbor Plain is the State of Western Australia. We expect that the issues in this State should be given equal treatment to the issues relating to the Murray-Darling Basin. That was the position I put. The second point is one that I made earlier today. What sort of a position is it when the Prime Minister robs - I use the word very carefully - the States of money that they are already receiving and then says that the money will be given back? As far as I know there are no gains in that for Western Australia because he is taking with one hand and is offering to give back money without any guarantees with the other. This is a very bad policy that the Prime Minister has put forward. It is one of the very important reasons we need to have a Latham Labor Government after 9 October. After that election we will look at all the commonwealth programs that may still exist. Should any of those programs, including the water programs, be in the interests of this State, we will be involved. I love the attitude of the Opposition on this. If we were to sign the National Water Initiative, we would have to find $130 million of Western Australian money. All the farmers listening need to know the second point because they have not been told by Mr Anderson. If Western Australia signs the National Water Initiative, the people around this State will have to pay the full cost of the water. If we were to sign that agreement, there would have to be something in it for the people of Western Australia. However, there is not. I represent the people of Western Australia. As far as I am concerned, we should unite in sending a clear message to John Howard that he cannot rob the States and then offer the money back. We cannot have a National Water Initiative that does not take into account the interests of Western Australia. A written agreement that policies will not be changed without consultation cannot be broken. I will continue to advocate for the interests of Western Australia and demand that the Prime Minister honour his agreements. Very importantly, we will keep pursuing our policies of water reform and water initiatives in Western Australia, which is what we have been doing since we were elected in 2001.
The member for Merredin should not believe what he reads in The West Australian . I will quote from the statement put out by the Prime Minister when he announced the national water fund - State and Territory Governments who are party to the National Water Initiative Agreements will be eligible to seek funding under the Fund. As far as I know, we have not signed the National Water Initiative. We would not be eligible to apply. It is extraordinary that we now have a statement from the national Government that we can apply. The statement states that we cannot but we are now told that we can. We need some clarification from the Prime Minister. Let me go to the heart of this issue. The Western Australian Government put a very clear position to the Commonwealth Government at the most recent Premiers’ meeting. The position was quite simple: the Australian continent does not come to an end at the Nullarbor Plain. To the west of the Nullarbor Plain is the State of Western Australia. We expect that the issues in this State should be given equal treatment to the issues relating to the Murray-Darling Basin. That was the position I put. The second point is one that I made earlier today. What sort of a position is it when the Prime Minister robs - I use the word very carefully - the States of money that they are already receiving and then says that the money will be given back? As far as I know there are no gains in that for Western Australia because he is taking with one hand and is offering to give back money without any guarantees with the other. This is a very bad policy that the Prime Minister has put forward. It is one of the very important reasons we need to have a Latham Labor Government after 9 October. After that election we will look at all the commonwealth programs that may still exist. Should any of those programs, including the water programs, be in the interests of this State, we will be involved. I love the attitude of the Opposition on this. If we were to sign the National Water Initiative, we would have to find $130 million of Western Australian money. All the farmers listening need to know the second point because they have not been told by Mr Anderson. If Western Australia signs the National Water Initiative, the people around this State will have to pay the full cost of the water. If we were to sign that agreement, there would have to be something in it for the people of Western Australia. However, there is not. I represent the people of Western Australia. As far as I am concerned, we should unite in sending a clear message to John Howard that he cannot rob the States and then offer the money back. We cannot have a National Water Initiative that does not take into account the interests of Western Australia. A written agreement that policies will not be changed without consultation cannot be broken. I will continue to advocate for the interests of Western Australia and demand that the Prime Minister honour his agreements. Very importantly, we will keep pursuing our policies of water reform and water initiatives in Western Australia, which is what we have been doing since we were elected in 2001.
Let me go to the heart of this issue. The Western Australian Government put a very clear position to the Commonwealth Government at the most recent Premiers’ meeting. The position was quite simple: the Australian continent does not come to an end at the Nullarbor Plain. To the west of the Nullarbor Plain is the State of Western Australia. We expect that the issues in this State should be given equal treatment to the issues relating to the Murray-Darling Basin. That was the position I put. The second point is one that I made earlier today. What sort of a position is it when the Prime Minister robs - I use the word very carefully - the States of money that they are already receiving and then says that the money will be given back? As far as I know there are no gains in that for Western Australia because he is taking with one hand and is offering to give back money without any guarantees with the other. This is a very bad policy that the Prime Minister has put forward. It is one of the very important reasons we need to have a Latham Labor Government after 9 October. After that election we will look at all the commonwealth programs that may still exist. Should any of those programs, including the water programs, be in the interests of this State, we will be involved. I love the attitude of the Opposition on this. If we were to sign the National Water Initiative, we would have to find $130 million of Western Australian money. All the farmers listening need to know the second point because they have not been told by Mr Anderson. If Western Australia signs the National Water Initiative, the people around this State will have to pay the full cost of the water. If we were to sign that agreement, there would have to be something in it for the people of Western Australia. However, there is not. I represent the people of Western Australia. As far as I am concerned, we should unite in sending a clear message to John Howard that he cannot rob the States and then offer the money back. We cannot have a National Water Initiative that does not take into account the interests of Western Australia. A written agreement that policies will not be changed without consultation cannot be broken. I will continue to advocate for the interests of Western Australia and demand that the Prime Minister honour his agreements. Very importantly, we will keep pursuing our policies of water reform and water initiatives in Western Australia, which is what we have been doing since we were elected in 2001.
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.