❓ Mr. Barnett questions the Treasurer about a projected increase in state debt and its potential impact on the state's credit rating. Mr. Ripper attributes the debt increase to pre-committed projects and deals from the previous coalition government, while defending his government's financial management.
AnsweredQoN 988Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Is it the case that state debt will increase by around $800 million in the 2001-02 fiscal year? (2) Is it also the case that this approximately 18 per cent increase in state debt in just one year will cause a marked deterioration in the ratio of net debt to revenue? (3) Will the Treasurer admit that if this deterioration continues, the State’s AAA credit rating will be put at serious risk? Mr RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
(2) Is it also the case that this approximately 18 per cent increase in state debt in just one year will cause a marked deterioration in the ratio of net debt to revenue? (3) Will the Treasurer admit that if this deterioration continues, the State’s AAA credit rating will be put at serious risk? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
(3) Will the Treasurer admit that if this deterioration continues, the State’s AAA credit rating will be put at serious risk? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
(1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
(2) Is it also the case that this approximately 18 per cent increase in state debt in just one year will cause a marked deterioration in the ratio of net debt to revenue? (3) Will the Treasurer admit that if this deterioration continues, the State’s AAA credit rating will be put at serious risk? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
(3) Will the Treasurer admit that if this deterioration continues, the State’s AAA credit rating will be put at serious risk? Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Mr RIPPER replied: (1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
(1)-(3) On the advice available to me, there is a $740.1 million increase in total public sector net debt over the 2001-02 financial year. What are the sources of that increase? An amount of $368 million arises from pre-committed coalition projects. Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Several members interjected. Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Mr RIPPER: I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that it does not matter. That is his view. He thinks that it does not matter that we had to continue with coalition projects. Another component of the debt is the Matrix Pty Ltd car leasing facility. Do members recall that one? It would have cost us $2 million a month if we had continued with it. Of course, we were not going to continue with that dud deal done by the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. This Government terminated the deal, and took the facility over to state debt. That adds to official state debt but it still saves the taxpayers a bomb. It was the right decision to make. Only yesterday the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure was talking about the railcar contract. The coalition proposed that that contract be privately financed. What would be the extra cost of privately financing it? It would be $25 million. Of course this Government canned that dud arrangement that the coalition was about to enter into. The outcome adds to official debt, but it is of benefit to taxpayers. This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
This Government is about value for money for taxpayers, not ideology. We are about managing the debt. Before I talk about managing the debt, I want to put this figure on the table. The coalition debt that this Government inherited and the debt forecast, the uncommitted projects and the dud deals that we had to change, account for 83 per cent of the debt increase. That debt increase is the coalition’s. It owns it. It foisted that debt increase upon us when it left us with the dud deals that we had to change to save taxpayers’ money. Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Mr Barnett: You have lost control of taxpayers’ money. Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
Mr RIPPER: The man who delivered five budget deficits out of eight and who could not deliver a surplus says that we have lost control. The important questions about debt are: can it be paid back, can the mortgage cost be handled and can the debt servicing costs be handled? We can handle them, because on this side of politics we can run a budget surplus. We will show tomorrow that we can run a budget surplus, we can forecast a budget surplus, and we can deliver a budget surplus. When we forecast and deliver a surplus we offset borrowing obligations. Our debt management plan is to run big surpluses so that we can fund the important infrastructure investment that we want to undertake in this State. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is so concerned about debt, because he could not deliver a surplus. We can deliver a surplus, so we can better fund a capital works program. A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
A measure of the viability of debt is the debt to revenue ratio. We inherited a debt to revenue ratio that was rapidly accelerating. That was the pre-election financial forecast which the Under Treasurer took to the media at the beginning of the election campaign. The debt to revenue ratio was breaking through the ceiling and the AAA credit rating was at risk. The first advice the Treasury gave this Government was that the AAA credit rating was at risk as a result of the previous Government’s decisions. We have controlled that debt to revenue ratio. We have flattened it out, which is one of our principal financial management targets. We will continue to control it and invest in the infrastructure that is needed to support this State’s development and the growth in jobs that we all want.
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.