❓ Dr. Edwards questions the Treasurer about the potential loss of GST revenue due to the Commonwealth Grants Commission's recommendations. The Treasurer responds, detailing the projected losses and criticizing the commission's formula for disadvantaging Western Australia.
AnsweredQoN 2Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
COMMONWEALTH GRANTS COMMISSION - ALLOCATION TO WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Can the Treasurer inform the house how much goods and services tax revenue the state government will lose if federal Treasurer Peter Costello adopts the latest recommendations from the Commonwealth Grants Commission. Mr E.S. RIPPER
Can the Treasurer inform the house how much goods and services tax revenue the state government will lose if federal Treasurer Peter Costello adopts the latest recommendations from the Commonwealth Grants Commission. Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
Mr Speaker - Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: Mr Speaker - Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr Speaker - Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
[Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: Mr Speaker - Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr Speaker - Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Vasse should not be taken as any authority on history, because the goods and services tax agreement, of course, was signed by Richard Court and inherited by this government. Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr T. Buswell : I didn’t see you down at the land tax meeting, Treasurer. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order, member for Vasse! Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : This is an important issue, and I would hope that even the member for Vasse would show some interest in the pernicious effect on Western Australia of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr T. Buswell interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : However, the member for Vasse appears to not have the interests of Western Australia at heart, because he does not even want to allow me to put forward the information. However, here it is for those other members of the house who I think are concerned about this state’s ability to fund services, infrastructure and the economic growth of the state. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : They want to shout me down, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : I am quite convinced that the people on my left want to finish question time now, but I am sure that we will finish at least the answer to this question. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is recommending a $272 million cut in GST revenue in 2007-08. That cut will mean that by 2010-11 we will have lost a total of $1.2 billion in commonwealth grants as a result of the Commonwealth Grants Commission recommendations. Of course, taking $1.2 billion of financial capacity from the state government’s grasp will affect our ability to deliver services, to build infrastructure and, indeed, unfortunately, to cut taxes. We are being punished for our economic success. If the Leader of the Opposition is so foolish to think that this is a matter that can be settled by negotiation, he has no understanding of the agreement that was signed by his own leader when he sat in the cabinet. Perhaps he did not pay attention when Richard Court briefed the cabinet on that particular matter. Under the formula adopted by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, states whose economies are doing well are punished - Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : Their share of commonwealth grants is transferred to the states whose economies are weaker. The Commonwealth Grants Commission - Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr P.D. Omodei : You didn’t even have an application - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time. Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr P.D. Omodei : You have got no guts. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time. Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Ms S.E. Walker : Why weren’t you at the rally? The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The Commonwealth Grants Commission is very quick to take account of Western Australia’s revenue growth but it is much slower to recognise the increasing cost pressures that are confronting the state. We are disadvantaged by the fact that the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not recognise sufficiently the cost of providing infrastructure in Western Australia to support the economic growth that it then uses as a reason to transfer a share of commonwealth grants from us to places such as New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
When we look at GST, which is what I am talking about at the moment, that is only part of the story. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member can harass me if he wants on any number of other issues, but I think that he really ought to pay attention to the interests of the state. He should think about the interests of the state because what is happening, member for Cottesloe and others - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the third time. I call the member for South Perth to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Mr E.S. RIPPER : What is happening, member for Cottesloe, is that our share of commonwealth grants is being steadily reduced because the Commonwealth Grants Commission says that we are more successful than other states. That means that we get a lower share of commonwealth grants. The money will go to the states that are not as successful. The difference will be $1.2 billion over four years. Imagine what infrastructure we could have built with that. Imagine if we were able to devote that or a portion of that, for example, to tax relief. Imagine if we were able to put some of that into services. Imagine what improvements we could get. That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
That is only part of the story. That is the GST part of the story. There is another side of the story, which is the total commonwealth tax take in Western Australia compared with total commonwealth expenditure. We are moving from having a slight benefit in terms of our share of the GST to being a donor state for the GST. The overall context is that the commonwealth taxes us $28 billion and gives back to Western Australia $24 billion. Even the member for Vasse, who has not been paying much attention during my answer, might be able to notice that there is a $4 billion difference, which is $2 000 for every Western Australian per annum. That is the extent of our subsidy to the rest of the country. I believe that the community of Western Australia is entitled to say that we are in the middle of a very strong period of economic growth and that we should take the proceeds of the economic growth and reinvest them in Western Australia’s future. The difficulty is that we cannot, as a state, capture the full proceeds of our economic growth because they are captured by other states and the commonwealth government. The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The situation is getting worse. Every year the subsidy grows. In 1986 there was no subsidy at all. It is now $4 billion. I think that the next time we do the analysis it will be $5 billion. It could be broken down for individual projects, and I will use the Ravensthorpe nickel project as an example. We are putting in $30 million of common-user infrastructure to support the project. The commonwealth is putting in $11 million. The commonwealth will get seven times the fiscal benefit from the Ravensthorpe nickel project than will the state government. When the state government receives its benefit, the grants commission will come along and redistribute even that benefit and give some of it to the other states. Fortunately, there is one political leader at a national level who understands Western Australia’s circumstances, and that leader is Kevin Rudd. He has promised to give Western Australia $100 million a year in royalties from the Gorgon gas project. That is something that John Howard has resolutely set his face against. We have never had any sensitivity from John Howard at all but Kevin Rudd understands. He listens. He has made a commitment to Western Australia and that will help us invest in infrastructure that will help the state grow. Thank you, Kevin Rudd, for listening. An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
An opposition member: Go on! The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
The SPEAKER : No, I have had enough! I will leave the chair until seven o’clock. [Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
[Continued on page 48.] Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
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.