❓ Opposition questions the government about fuel prices and revenue, suggesting subsidies and opposing fee increases. Treasurer Ripper defends the government's position, highlighting Commonwealth taxes and comparing WA's situation to Queensland's.
AnsweredQoN 534Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Following the comments of the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my question is rather topical. I refer the Treasurer to the toll of spiralling fuel prices on household and business budgets, and to the Premier’s lame duck response to the truckies at Sunday’s protest rally. (1) Why is the state government deliberately pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars in extra oil and fuel tax revenue rather than using some of this unbudgeted revenue to subsidise the price of fuel? (2) Will the Treasurer agree to forgo some goods and services tax revenue from the sale of fuel in Western Australia to reduce fuel prices, as Premier Beattie has done in Queensland? (3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
I refer the Treasurer to the toll of spiralling fuel prices on household and business budgets, and to the Premier’s lame duck response to the truckies at Sunday’s protest rally. (1) Why is the state government deliberately pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars in extra oil and fuel tax revenue rather than using some of this unbudgeted revenue to subsidise the price of fuel? (2) Will the Treasurer agree to forgo some goods and services tax revenue from the sale of fuel in Western Australia to reduce fuel prices, as Premier Beattie has done in Queensland? (3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(1) Why is the state government deliberately pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars in extra oil and fuel tax revenue rather than using some of this unbudgeted revenue to subsidise the price of fuel? (2) Will the Treasurer agree to forgo some goods and services tax revenue from the sale of fuel in Western Australia to reduce fuel prices, as Premier Beattie has done in Queensland? (3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(2) Will the Treasurer agree to forgo some goods and services tax revenue from the sale of fuel in Western Australia to reduce fuel prices, as Premier Beattie has done in Queensland? (3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
I refer the Treasurer to the toll of spiralling fuel prices on household and business budgets, and to the Premier’s lame duck response to the truckies at Sunday’s protest rally. (1) Why is the state government deliberately pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars in extra oil and fuel tax revenue rather than using some of this unbudgeted revenue to subsidise the price of fuel? (2) Will the Treasurer agree to forgo some goods and services tax revenue from the sale of fuel in Western Australia to reduce fuel prices, as Premier Beattie has done in Queensland? (3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(1) Why is the state government deliberately pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars in extra oil and fuel tax revenue rather than using some of this unbudgeted revenue to subsidise the price of fuel? (2) Will the Treasurer agree to forgo some goods and services tax revenue from the sale of fuel in Western Australia to reduce fuel prices, as Premier Beattie has done in Queensland? (3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(2) Will the Treasurer agree to forgo some goods and services tax revenue from the sale of fuel in Western Australia to reduce fuel prices, as Premier Beattie has done in Queensland? (3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(3) Will the Treasurer insist that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure oppose any increase to the heavy haulage registration fees during her deliberation with the National Transport Commission as a show of real support for our embattled transport operators? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(1) Let us see who collects what on fuel. There are no state taxes on fuel in Western Australia. However, there are commonwealth taxes. There is a fuel excise tax and that - The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Avon and Leschenault. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise tax - Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Avon to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : That fuel excise amounts to $14 billion. The commonwealth will collect $14 billion in fuel excise this financial year, and $2 billion of that fuel excise, or 15 per cent, will be collected in Western Australia. I would like to ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure what percentage of AusLink funding we get? The commonwealth gets 15 per cent of its petroleum revenue from this state; how much does it spend on our transport? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Five point eight per cent. Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : So the commonwealth is taking 15 per cent of revenue in fuel excise from this state and it is returning 5.8 per cent of AusLink funding. Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Some members on the other side are bleating about the goods and services tax. The last time I looked, the GST was imposed by the Australian Taxation Office pursuant to a commonwealth act. We rely on the commonwealth to advise us about the extent of GST collections. The commonwealth has advised us on GST collections and its advice has come from a very senior source: it has come from none other than the Prime Minister, who said on the Liam Bartlett program on 9 September 2005 - . . . a lot of the money that people are spending on their fuel bills is money they are not spending on other items, which carry the GST, so it is debatable whether in net terms the states are a lot better off, as a result of the increase in the price of petrol. The commonwealth tells us whether we will get any more in GST, and the most senior figure in the commonwealth government has told us on Liam Bartlett’s program that it is unlikely that we will get anything extra from the GST as a result of fuel prices. That stands to reason. If people spend more on fuel they will spend less on other things and we will get less GST from those other expenditures. (2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(2) I will now deal with the issue of Queensland. If people want what Queensland has they will have to take the whole package. I will quote an assertion about Queensland that comes from another senior coalition source, who said - Compared to other states, Queensland has fewer beds and fewer procedures largely because Queensland’s health spending per person is the lowest in the country: at just $440 a year, only three fifths of that of Western Australia. That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission - The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : That person went on to say - The Commonwealth Grants Commission has just estimated that Queensland would need to spend an additional $640 million a year to bring public hospital spending to the average level of the other states - Yes, Queensland has a fuel subsidy system, but that is apparently at the expense of its health system. If the opposition member wants us to adopt the full Queensland package, perhaps he would have us adopt the Queensland levels of health expenditure. Despite the economic ignorance of those on the other side, I am sure that even they would understand that we cannot spend the same dollar twice. Maybe they would like those other elements of the Queensland package. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Leschenault to order for the third time and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : Let us look at the fixed charges for running a six-cylinder Commodore motor vehicle in Western Australia compared with Queensland. In Queensland a person will pay $606 a year in registration and insurance charges, whereas in Western Australia he will pay only $466 a year. Western Australia has the lowest fixed charges for running a motor vehicle of all the Australian states. The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call the member for Vasse to order for the second time. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : Those members opposite who want to adopt the Queensland package had better sign up for a $140 increase in the cost of registering and insuring a motor vehicle, and they had better sign up for state health expenditure that is only three-fifths of the level of health expenditure in Western Australia. A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
A lot of supposition exists about what our oil royalties will deliver. It will depend, of course, upon the average price for oil and the average price for liquefied natural gas across the financial year. The assumption on the other side of the chamber is that anything that will happen to the oil price will also happen to the LNG price. Wrong! There is an increased divorce of LNG and oil prices. The old formulas that worked for oil royalties do not necessarily work any more because of the divorce between LNG and oil prices. Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Secondly, some very reputable people have made forecasts about oil prices. I quote a number of forecasts so that members understand that some different figures are in the marketplace. For example, Access Economics, in its June quarter 2005 forecast, has these forecasts for oil prices per barrel for the next four years - $US40.76, $US30.83, $US32.15 and $US33.15. UBS Warburg, in its June 2005 quarter forecast, has the figures of $US44.75 and $US39 a barrel. There are people out there who do not have the apparent extreme optimism - or maybe it is pessimism - of people on the other side of the house. Importantly, Mr Speaker, it is the average price over the year that counts; it is the LNG price that counts. In the final analysis, we do not receive the royalties anyway. The royalties are taken away from us and given to Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Members opposite want us to spend money that we do not have on a subsidy that would make very little difference to the average motorist. (3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
(3) I need to deal with one more question; namely, the trucking industry. The government takes the difficulties of the trucking industry very seriously. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : My colleague the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is working with the trucking industry on better compliance, better efforts to stamp out cowboy activities and better arrangements, so that people on the bottom tiers of the industry do not bear the full brunt of fuel price increases. That work is ongoing. The opposition has not advanced any case, in the face of what I have said, for us to move from our current position.
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.