❓ Question regarding a potential financial penalty to WA for not complying with national competition policy on retail trading hours, despite prior election promises. The Minister explains the changed circumstances and the need for community consultation.
AnsweredQoN 542Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
When the Labor Party wrote its election policy commitments on retail trading hours, it was clearly fully aware of the requirements of the national competition policy and that not complying with the competition policy agreement could result in financial penalty to the States; yet, with this knowledge the Labor Party promised the people of Western Australia it would not deregulate retail trading hours. Two years later, what has changed? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
What has changed is that the National Competition Council has made it very clear to Western Australia that if we do not make changes in this area, we will suffer a substantial reduction in competition payments, which are in the order of $70 million a year for not only one year but also each year into the future. Mr C.J. Barnett: Are you claiming $70 million? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: What has changed is that the National Competition Council has made it very clear to Western Australia that if we do not make changes in this area, we will suffer a substantial reduction in competition payments, which are in the order of $70 million a year for not only one year but also each year into the future. Mr C.J. Barnett: Are you claiming $70 million? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
What has changed is that the National Competition Council has made it very clear to Western Australia that if we do not make changes in this area, we will suffer a substantial reduction in competition payments, which are in the order of $70 million a year for not only one year but also each year into the future. Mr C.J. Barnett: Are you claiming $70 million? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr C.J. Barnett: Are you claiming $70 million? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: What has changed is that the National Competition Council has made it very clear to Western Australia that if we do not make changes in this area, we will suffer a substantial reduction in competition payments, which are in the order of $70 million a year for not only one year but also each year into the future. Mr C.J. Barnett: Are you claiming $70 million? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
What has changed is that the National Competition Council has made it very clear to Western Australia that if we do not make changes in this area, we will suffer a substantial reduction in competition payments, which are in the order of $70 million a year for not only one year but also each year into the future. Mr C.J. Barnett: Are you claiming $70 million? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr C.J. Barnett: Are you claiming $70 million? Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition cannot resist it. If he slid back under his rubbish bin he would present better. He thinks that by being nasty and saying stupid and untrue things, he somehow gets some credibility. He cannot help himself. When the Premier is on his feet - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
The SPEAKER: I think the member for Merredin is actually hoping that the minister will address his answer to him. I do not particularly want question time to last a couple of hours. I ask the minister to direct his answer to the member for Merredin. Point of Order Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: The member for Kalgoorlie referred to the member for Nollamara as Jackboot Johnny. I do not think that is appropriate and he should withdraw it. The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
The SPEAKER: I did not hear that, but it is inappropriate to refer to anyone in this place other than by their office or by their electorate name. I think members quite often refer to other members by nicknames. They are quite inappropriate, and if I hear them I will ask people to withdraw those comments. I did not hear that one, and I am sure the member for Kalgoorlie is bright enough to know that he is not allowed to do that. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The member for Merredin asked a very important question, and I would like to answer it, but if members opposite put in snide insinuating remarks that attack me, I will respond to them, as I have done before, unless the Speaker insists that such interjections will not be countenanced. I am very happy to deal with interjections; I can handle interjections, particularly when they are of no substance and are just nasty, but I would like to address the very important question asked by the member for Merredin. The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
The change has been the direct threat to remove a substantial amount of money tied specifically to the State Government not changing its current trading hours regime. Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr B.J. Grylls: That is only in the city. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That is right; we are only talking about the metropolitan area, because the current regime for country areas is not under review, and is not the source of the problem with the National Competition Council. The issue for the member for Merredin is that a whole range of matters are subject to competition policy, and are potential threats. It has become clearer that, of all those issues, retail trading hours are being targeted for the biggest hit. It was therefore thought to be most appropriate for the Government to go out and consult key stakeholders and the community before considering what change, if any, would be made. There is no foregone decision as to what change will be made. If the State does not change, and cops a hit of $10 million to $30 million, or whatever it might be, the taxpayers of the State will suffer, either through reduced services or increased taxes. The Government will make the call. It is a hard decision: to make a change of some form or to do nothing. The consequences will impact on the community, depending on the decision, either widely as a result of loss of services, or more narrowly in the case of those affected by changes to retail trading hours. The people of Western Australia will be taken into account, and they will have an opportunity to voice their opinions. We will listen very carefully to the whole range of opinions and then make the call. The Government thought it most appropriate - given that there is a potential cost whatever we do or do not do - that we engage people and listen to them. I know that generally Liberal Governments do not listen - they have a track record of that - but this Government takes consultation seriously. That is what we will do before any decision is made prior to 30 June.
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.