❓ A parliamentary question seeks clarification on a reported $19 million gain in the Department of Education and Training's financial results, inquiring about its source, impact on programs, and planned use. The Minister's response attributes the gain to estimation discrepancies and a change in reporting cycles, stating no programs were cut and no additional revenue was generated.
AnsweredQoN 1432Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the 2002-03 government financial results report dated September 2003. (1) In what areas within the Department of Education and Training was the gain of $19 million in sales of goods and services made? (2) Have any programs been cut or reduced in order to reach the $19 million revenue increase? (3) How will the increase in revenue be spent? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(1) In what areas within the Department of Education and Training was the gain of $19 million in sales of goods and services made? (2) Have any programs been cut or reduced in order to reach the $19 million revenue increase? (3) How will the increase in revenue be spent? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(2) Have any programs been cut or reduced in order to reach the $19 million revenue increase? (3) How will the increase in revenue be spent? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(3) How will the increase in revenue be spent? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(1) In what areas within the Department of Education and Training was the gain of $19 million in sales of goods and services made? (2) Have any programs been cut or reduced in order to reach the $19 million revenue increase? (3) How will the increase in revenue be spent? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(2) Have any programs been cut or reduced in order to reach the $19 million revenue increase? (3) How will the increase in revenue be spent? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(3) How will the increase in revenue be spent? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(1) The gain of $19 million represents a variance in central office revenues and school revenues against the department’s 2002-03 estimates. The 2002-03 estimates for the department are generally less than the actuals as the estimates could not be updated due to problems with the cut-off date to update the budget estimates. That prevented any changes to revenues and expenses in the estimates. The gain also reflects a change in school reporting whereby the actual results include 13 months of school data compared with 12 months of data in the estimates. (2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(2) No. (3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
(3) No additional revenue is generated by the department.
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.