❓ Question regarding lost opportunities due to the opposition's failure to allow small businesses to choose their opening hours, answered with accusations of being modern-day Luddites.
AnsweredQoN 788Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
EXTENDED RETAIL TRADING HOURS
As a former small business operator, I understand the benefits of having the freedom to tailor the products and opening hours that best suit my customers and to grow my business. Can the Treasurer please explain to the house some of the lost opportunities for the state, resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small business — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat, member for Darling Range. Usually in this place questions are at least heard in silence a majority of the time. Today I do not think I have heard one question that has been heard in silence. I would like to hear the question, no matter who it is from, heard in silence. Before I ask the member to resume his question, I will formally call the member for Joondalup for the second time. Mr A.J. SIMPSON : Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the lost opportunities for the state resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small businesses in Western Australia a choice of when to open and close? Point of Order Mr M. McGOWAN : Standing order 77 makes it quite plain that questions should not contain argument, allegations, inference or imputation and that they should not be repetitive. This question, following on from the last question asked by a government member, infringes every one of the provisions of that rule. I ask that it be ruled out of order. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL
As a former small business operator, I understand the benefits of having the freedom to tailor the products and opening hours that best suit my customers and to grow my business. Can the Treasurer please explain to the house some of the lost opportunities for the state, resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small business — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat, member for Darling Range. Usually in this place questions are at least heard in silence a majority of the time. Today I do not think I have heard one question that has been heard in silence. I would like to hear the question, no matter who it is from, heard in silence. Before I ask the member to resume his question, I will formally call the member for Joondalup for the second time. Mr A.J. SIMPSON : Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the lost opportunities for the state resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small businesses in Western Australia a choice of when to open and close? Point of Order Mr M. McGOWAN : Standing order 77 makes it quite plain that questions should not contain argument, allegations, inference or imputation and that they should not be repetitive. This question, following on from the last question asked by a government member, infringes every one of the provisions of that rule. I ask that it be ruled out of order. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL
AnswerView source ↗
Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat, member for Darling Range. Usually in this place questions are at least heard in silence a majority of the time. Today I do not think I have heard one question that has been heard in silence. I would like to hear the question, no matter who it is from, heard in silence. Before I ask the member to resume his question, I will formally call the member for Joondalup for the second time. Mr A.J. SIMPSON : Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the lost opportunities for the state resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small businesses in Western Australia a choice of when to open and close? Point of Order Mr M. McGOWAN : Standing order 77 makes it quite plain that questions should not contain argument, allegations, inference or imputation and that they should not be repetitive. This question, following on from the last question asked by a government member, infringes every one of the provisions of that rule. I ask that it be ruled out of order. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
The SPEAKER : Take a seat, member for Darling Range. Usually in this place questions are at least heard in silence a majority of the time. Today I do not think I have heard one question that has been heard in silence. I would like to hear the question, no matter who it is from, heard in silence. Before I ask the member to resume his question, I will formally call the member for Joondalup for the second time. Mr A.J. SIMPSON : Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the lost opportunities for the state resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small businesses in Western Australia a choice of when to open and close? Point of Order Mr M. McGOWAN : Standing order 77 makes it quite plain that questions should not contain argument, allegations, inference or imputation and that they should not be repetitive. This question, following on from the last question asked by a government member, infringes every one of the provisions of that rule. I ask that it be ruled out of order. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
Mr A.J. SIMPSON : Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the lost opportunities for the state resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small businesses in Western Australia a choice of when to open and close? Point of Order Mr M. McGOWAN : Standing order 77 makes it quite plain that questions should not contain argument, allegations, inference or imputation and that they should not be repetitive. This question, following on from the last question asked by a government member, infringes every one of the provisions of that rule. I ask that it be ruled out of order. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat, member for Darling Range. Usually in this place questions are at least heard in silence a majority of the time. Today I do not think I have heard one question that has been heard in silence. I would like to hear the question, no matter who it is from, heard in silence. Before I ask the member to resume his question, I will formally call the member for Joondalup for the second time. Mr A.J. SIMPSON : Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the lost opportunities for the state resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small businesses in Western Australia a choice of when to open and close? Point of Order Mr M. McGOWAN : Standing order 77 makes it quite plain that questions should not contain argument, allegations, inference or imputation and that they should not be repetitive. This question, following on from the last question asked by a government member, infringes every one of the provisions of that rule. I ask that it be ruled out of order. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
The SPEAKER : Take a seat, member for Darling Range. Usually in this place questions are at least heard in silence a majority of the time. Today I do not think I have heard one question that has been heard in silence. I would like to hear the question, no matter who it is from, heard in silence. Before I ask the member to resume his question, I will formally call the member for Joondalup for the second time. Mr A.J. SIMPSON : Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the lost opportunities for the state resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small businesses in Western Australia a choice of when to open and close? Point of Order Mr M. McGOWAN : Standing order 77 makes it quite plain that questions should not contain argument, allegations, inference or imputation and that they should not be repetitive. This question, following on from the last question asked by a government member, infringes every one of the provisions of that rule. I ask that it be ruled out of order. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
Mr A.J. SIMPSON : Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the lost opportunities for the state resulting from the opposition’s failure to deliver small businesses in Western Australia a choice of when to open and close? Point of Order Mr M. McGOWAN : Standing order 77 makes it quite plain that questions should not contain argument, allegations, inference or imputation and that they should not be repetitive. This question, following on from the last question asked by a government member, infringes every one of the provisions of that rule. I ask that it be ruled out of order. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
The SPEAKER : I rule that the question is in order. I would like to hear the Treasurer’s answer. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
Last week I was looking at some of my old university economic history texts with my sons. In the late 1700s there was an interesting industrial movement that formed in England called the Luddites. The Luddites were a group of people who opposed change. They would go around and try to break machines. Some were brought out to Australia as convicts, and I think some of their descendants have wound up on the opposition benches. They are the modern-day, twenty-first-century Luddites. They are people who live in the metropolitan area who want to deny choice to consumers and businesses of the metropolitan area. Let us consider some of the implications of the approach of these regulatory flat-earthers. As the Premier pointed out, the opposition has denied consumers the right to choose when they shop. People are denied the opportunity to stop and shop on the way home. The opposition continues to bind small business up with red tape. However, there are 700 other reasons why the opposition should support this reform. I refer to the 700 jobs that would be created in Western Australia if the opposition supported the deregulation of retail trading hours proposed by the government. King Ludd, the Leader of the Opposition, has the gall to criticise us in this house for not protecting employment when we know that he is turning his back on creating 700 jobs for Western Australians among those 70 000. He should hang his head in shame. It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
It is interesting that there has been some response from local government in Western Australia. The local government in the electorate of the member for Joondalup has written to the government and asked that Joondalup be made a tourism precinct. I am assuming the member for Joondalup does not support that. Does he support it? Is he behind his local community? I am all ears. I got a letter recently from my good friend Mayor Charlie Zannino of the City of Swan. He wants reform to retail trading in Swan. The good news is that that letter was hotly pursued by a letter of support from the member for Midland. She said that the City of Swan wants reform and deregulation of trading hours, and so does she. My question to the member for Midland is: if it is good enough for the shoppers of Midland, why is not good enough for the shoppers in the rest of Western Australia?
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.