❓ Opposition questions the Minister about the formula used to distribute regional development funds, alleging lack of transparency and potential pork-barrelling. Minister defends the formula and accuses the opposition of opposing regional funding.
AnsweredQoN 535Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ROYALTIES FOR REGIONS — FUNDING FORMULA
Last week the minister acknowledged that, in conjunction with his department and the Minister for Local Government, he developed the formula for distributing the $400 million country local government fund. To refresh the minister’s memory on that formula, I will now share it with him and the house by holding up this chart, which states — Ai = k.pi + D(Gi+Ri) Sum(Gi) + Sum(Ri) Can the minister explain how he developed this complex formula without producing a single document in either his office or that of the department, as he has claimed in repeated responses to freedom of information applications? Was it like Einstein with E = MC 2 ? Did the minister dream about it at night? Even Albert had to write his formula down when he woke up! Was it Leonardo da Castrilli’s Principia Mathematica that produced this formula? Or is it rather that the minister simply does not want the public to see the tawdry calculations that he used to pork-barrel National Party electorates? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Some people in this place do not understand the question, member for Armadale, and some of us on our feet are not necessarily exempt from that. If the minister feels that he has an answer, I urge him to get to it. Mr B.J. GRYLLS
Last week the minister acknowledged that, in conjunction with his department and the Minister for Local Government, he developed the formula for distributing the $400 million country local government fund. To refresh the minister’s memory on that formula, I will now share it with him and the house by holding up this chart, which states — Ai = k.pi + D(Gi+Ri) Sum(Gi) + Sum(Ri) Can the minister explain how he developed this complex formula without producing a single document in either his office or that of the department, as he has claimed in repeated responses to freedom of information applications? Was it like Einstein with E = MC 2 ? Did the minister dream about it at night? Even Albert had to write his formula down when he woke up! Was it Leonardo da Castrilli’s Principia Mathematica that produced this formula? Or is it rather that the minister simply does not want the public to see the tawdry calculations that he used to pork-barrel National Party electorates? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Some people in this place do not understand the question, member for Armadale, and some of us on our feet are not necessarily exempt from that. If the minister feels that he has an answer, I urge him to get to it. Mr B.J. GRYLLS
AnswerView source ↗
The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Some people in this place do not understand the question, member for Armadale, and some of us on our feet are not necessarily exempt from that. If the minister feels that he has an answer, I urge him to get to it. Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : Some people in this place do not understand the question, member for Armadale, and some of us on our feet are not necessarily exempt from that. If the minister feels that he has an answer, I urge him to get to it. Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Some people in this place do not understand the question, member for Armadale, and some of us on our feet are not necessarily exempt from that. If the minister feels that he has an answer, I urge him to get to it. Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : Some people in this place do not understand the question, member for Armadale, and some of us on our feet are not necessarily exempt from that. If the minister feels that he has an answer, I urge him to get to it. Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS replied: The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The member for Armadale raises a very serious issue, because there is one difference between the Liberal-National side of the Parliament, which has committed $100 million to regional Western Australian local governments to meet their asset needs, and the side of the person who asked the question, which has already said it will scrap the fund. This is not an argument about the formula. Members opposite do not want to commit the money to regional Western Australia. They simply do not want the money — Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr D.A. Templeman : Show some accountability! You’ve got none at all! The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : Member for Mandurah, I formally call you for the first time. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : That is actually what this is about. I can provide the information about the formula to the member on notice, because it is a complex formula. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : I want to know how you developed it without a single piece of paper. That is the question. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Margaret! The question is not what it means; the question is, how you developed it. The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale, you know the rule about referring to people in this place by their seats. I am sure that you will recover from that. If you want the minister to provide some information, I am hearing that he intends to do that, and I ask you to stop interjecting. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am happy to give a layman’s explanation of what the member put forward, and I am more than happy to table it. The funding formula is based on $172.50 per capita. That formula is subject to a floor of $400 000 and is capped at $900 000. The decision to put the floor and cap in place was in recognition of the fact that a major infrastructure project in regional Western Australia would need a minimum amount of $400 000 for it to be able to start. The balance of the formula is based on a share of Local Government Grants Commission allocations based on the assessment of equalisation needs and road asset preservation needs. The needs component is based on a combination of the Local Government Grants Commission’s equalisation grants and the road grant component. These two grants are indicators of equalisation need—which is where local governments have limited capacity to fund service provision needs, measured by a comprehensive assessment, including disability factors—as well as asset preservation needs, which reflects different road lengths, standards and costs in each local government. The Department of Local Government put in the asset preservation formula component in response to the Western Australian Local Government Association, because the association’s formula was based only on equalisation assessment, based on operational or recurrent expenditure. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : You are not answering the question. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : I am. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : The question is: how did you do it without a single piece of paper? The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : Member for Armadale! Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The Western Australian Local Government Association formula did not take into account asset preservation or infrastructure needs, and we made sure that, since this was an infrastructure program—a $100 million commitment to country local governments based on infrastructure—that should be part of the formula. That is why we wrote that in. The population component, which I think the opposition is also critical of — Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Was that on the basis of advice? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : Yes. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan : Well, where are the documents? Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : The document, to my understanding, is part of the cabinet submission, and that is why it was not provided as part of the member’s freedom of information application. The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The population component—that is, $172.50 per capita—was put in place to ensure that local governments with large road needs in local government areas with small populations did not distort the allocation. For example, areas with more roads and therefore a higher cost of maintaining roads but a smaller population would have distorted the overall formula. Once again, I put on record that I am very comfortable with the formula for the country local government fund. It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
It was an important part of the process of forming government and of the new government’s commitment to regional Western Australia. It is an important part of ensuring that jobs are created in regional communities and it is an important commitment for this government to take forward. Local government really needs to know that this government is committed to an ongoing investment in their — Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mrs M.H. Roberts : It is like The Hollowmen wheeling their documents through the cabinet room — The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
The SPEAKER : I think the member for Armadale might be waiting to ask a supplementary question, but before she gets to that question I formally call the member for Midland to order for the first time. I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
I urge the minister to conclude his answer. Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
Mr B.J. GRYLLS : This is an important fund that will enable local governments to go forward so that they can plan for their future asset needs. Their planning has been thrown into turmoil by the fact that the Labor Party had already agreed to scrap the fund. If members opposite were that concerned about the formula for the allocation of funding and this notional pork-barrelling, where was their criticism of the federal government when it announced its direct infrastructure spending in regional Western Australia? There was no criticism of the federal government, only of this government! In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
In partnership with the commonwealth government, the state government is injecting unprecedented support for local government into regional Western Australia. That is a good thing, and I absolutely stand by the formula that is supported by the Liberal-National government.
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.