❓ Ms Davies questions the Premier on why the $6 billion surplus isn't used to freeze government fees and charges to ease cost of living pressures. The Premier defends the government's existing cost-of-living measures and criticises the opposition's financial management.
AnsweredQoN 599Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
COST OF LIVING — FEES AND CHARGES
599. Ms M.J. DAVIES to the Premier:
I refer to comments made by Ms
Louise Giolitto, CEO of the Western Australian Council of Social Service, on 29
September, when she said —
''At
a time when the cost of non-discretionary items like food, transport and
housing are rising at an alarming rate, the state government should be using
any surplus money to ease the pain for struggling households,'' �
With
a $6 billion surplus, why does the Premier continue to refuse to consider
freezing government fees and charges to provide much needed and urgent
relief for these households?
599. Ms M.J. DAVIES to the Premier:
I refer to comments made by Ms
Louise Giolitto, CEO of the Western Australian Council of Social Service, on 29
September, when she said —
''At
a time when the cost of non-discretionary items like food, transport and
housing are rising at an alarming rate, the state government should be using
any surplus money to ease the pain for struggling households,'' �
With
a $6 billion surplus, why does the Premier continue to refuse to consider
freezing government fees and charges to provide much needed and urgent
relief for these households?
AnswerView source ↗
That
is the same question as the one that was asked yesterday. Firstly, I am sorry
that I missed the start of question time—I could not hear the bells—but
I will answer the member's question on these matters. The reality is
that in the state budget, we put down fees and charges. We put them down. We
gave everyone a $400 credit on their electricity bill. Across the board there
was, from memory, a 3.8 per cent reduction in fees and charges. We are the only
government in Australia that has done that. No other government has put them
down. We are the only one that has done that. As I said to the member
yesterday, we have also provided everyone with free rapid antigen tests. No
other government in Australia did that. We have also provided the two-zone
transport fare that people who use public transport can access. Public
transport in the eastern states is markedly more expensive than it is here. We
have also provided support for people in the regions who want to fly to Perth
by capping airfares. That kicked in on 1 July. These are all cost-of-living measures
that benefit people. In addition to the $400 payment, we have provided an
energy assistance payment of $318 to pensioners and eligible households—300
000 households across the state are eligible for that payment.
In the wages policy that we have just
launched, the biggest benefit will go to the lowest paid workers. People who go out there and work for 38 or 40 hours a week
and receive the least amount of pay will get the biggest benefit out of
the wages policy. Some people complain about that. They say that is not fair;
the most highly paid should get the most. I do not agree. I support the lower
paid workers.
We have put all those things in
place. If the Liberals and Nationals had their way, we would be in deficit.
That is their modus operandi. Every time over the last five and a half years
that we have got the state's finances back on track, they have attacked
it—every single time. If they had their way and we went through every
commitment that they have made, everything that they have criticised, and
everything that they say should have been funded, we would be significantly in deficit. What would that mean? That would mean
that our debt would climb, and our interest payments would climb, at a time
when interest rates are going up. As I said yesterday, and I am going to keep
saying this, every indicator says that next year, there will be a worldwide
recession. That is what they are saying. That is what the economists around the
world are saying. A whole confluence of events is pointing in that direction.
Hopefully, that will not occur, but I suspect it will. What is the best
position for Western Australia to be in if that happens—deficits and
debt, as opposition members are advocating for, or surpluses, with debt going
down, so that we can afford to respond and can manage a decline in revenues
that might occur? Would opposition members rather be in the position of New
South Wales and Victoria, with $150 billion or so worth of debt each, and with
deficits in the vicinity of $20 billion a year? Would they rather that? No. I would
not, but clearly they would.
When opposition members were in
office, true, they delivered deficits, and debt climbed to $44 billion. We have
now got it down to $29 billion. Their model was to sell off Western Power.
Victoria and New South Wales sold off their electricity entities, and where are
they now? That one-off sugar hit has gone. We now also have the energy crisis,
for which privatised entities are partly responsible.
Your model is catastrophic. You were
catastrophic in government, you are catastrophic in opposition and you would be
catastrophic if you were ever re-elected.
is the same question as the one that was asked yesterday. Firstly, I am sorry
that I missed the start of question time—I could not hear the bells—but
I will answer the member's question on these matters. The reality is
that in the state budget, we put down fees and charges. We put them down. We
gave everyone a $400 credit on their electricity bill. Across the board there
was, from memory, a 3.8 per cent reduction in fees and charges. We are the only
government in Australia that has done that. No other government has put them
down. We are the only one that has done that. As I said to the member
yesterday, we have also provided everyone with free rapid antigen tests. No
other government in Australia did that. We have also provided the two-zone
transport fare that people who use public transport can access. Public
transport in the eastern states is markedly more expensive than it is here. We
have also provided support for people in the regions who want to fly to Perth
by capping airfares. That kicked in on 1 July. These are all cost-of-living measures
that benefit people. In addition to the $400 payment, we have provided an
energy assistance payment of $318 to pensioners and eligible households—300
000 households across the state are eligible for that payment.
In the wages policy that we have just
launched, the biggest benefit will go to the lowest paid workers. People who go out there and work for 38 or 40 hours a week
and receive the least amount of pay will get the biggest benefit out of
the wages policy. Some people complain about that. They say that is not fair;
the most highly paid should get the most. I do not agree. I support the lower
paid workers.
We have put all those things in
place. If the Liberals and Nationals had their way, we would be in deficit.
That is their modus operandi. Every time over the last five and a half years
that we have got the state's finances back on track, they have attacked
it—every single time. If they had their way and we went through every
commitment that they have made, everything that they have criticised, and
everything that they say should have been funded, we would be significantly in deficit. What would that mean? That would mean
that our debt would climb, and our interest payments would climb, at a time
when interest rates are going up. As I said yesterday, and I am going to keep
saying this, every indicator says that next year, there will be a worldwide
recession. That is what they are saying. That is what the economists around the
world are saying. A whole confluence of events is pointing in that direction.
Hopefully, that will not occur, but I suspect it will. What is the best
position for Western Australia to be in if that happens—deficits and
debt, as opposition members are advocating for, or surpluses, with debt going
down, so that we can afford to respond and can manage a decline in revenues
that might occur? Would opposition members rather be in the position of New
South Wales and Victoria, with $150 billion or so worth of debt each, and with
deficits in the vicinity of $20 billion a year? Would they rather that? No. I would
not, but clearly they would.
When opposition members were in
office, true, they delivered deficits, and debt climbed to $44 billion. We have
now got it down to $29 billion. Their model was to sell off Western Power.
Victoria and New South Wales sold off their electricity entities, and where are
they now? That one-off sugar hit has gone. We now also have the energy crisis,
for which privatised entities are partly responsible.
Your model is catastrophic. You were
catastrophic in government, you are catastrophic in opposition and you would be
catastrophic if you were ever re-elected.
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.