❓ Hon George Cash asks about budget revenue increases compared to pre-election estimates for 2001-2003. Hon Kim Chance responds, detailing revenue increases, attributing them to economic factors, and highlighting investments in health, education, and law and order, while also criticising the previous government's financial performance.
AnsweredQoN 1369Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
How much higher was budget revenue for each of the financial years ending 30 June 2001, 2002 and 2003 than estimated in Treasury’s pre-election financial statements? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
On behalf of the Minister for Racing and Gaming, I thank the member for some notice of this question. Compared with the estimates contained in the pre-election financial projections statement, actual government operating revenue was $355 million higher in 2000-01, $892 million higher in 2001-02, and $1 544 million higher in 2002-03. These increases primarily reflect large parameter-driven factors such as a stronger than expected oil price and property market, rather than government policy decisions. In this regard, revenue measures taken by this Government are estimated to have raised additional revenue of $23.5 million in 2001-02 and $243 million in 2002-03. Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : On behalf of the Minister for Racing and Gaming, I thank the member for some notice of this question. Compared with the estimates contained in the pre-election financial projections statement, actual government operating revenue was $355 million higher in 2000-01, $892 million higher in 2001-02, and $1 544 million higher in 2002-03. These increases primarily reflect large parameter-driven factors such as a stronger than expected oil price and property market, rather than government policy decisions. In this regard, revenue measures taken by this Government are estimated to have raised additional revenue of $23.5 million in 2001-02 and $243 million in 2002-03. Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
On behalf of the Minister for Racing and Gaming, I thank the member for some notice of this question. Compared with the estimates contained in the pre-election financial projections statement, actual government operating revenue was $355 million higher in 2000-01, $892 million higher in 2001-02, and $1 544 million higher in 2002-03. These increases primarily reflect large parameter-driven factors such as a stronger than expected oil price and property market, rather than government policy decisions. In this regard, revenue measures taken by this Government are estimated to have raised additional revenue of $23.5 million in 2001-02 and $243 million in 2002-03. Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Compared with the estimates contained in the pre-election financial projections statement, actual government operating revenue was $355 million higher in 2000-01, $892 million higher in 2001-02, and $1 544 million higher in 2002-03. These increases primarily reflect large parameter-driven factors such as a stronger than expected oil price and property market, rather than government policy decisions. In this regard, revenue measures taken by this Government are estimated to have raised additional revenue of $23.5 million in 2001-02 and $243 million in 2002-03. Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : On behalf of the Minister for Racing and Gaming, I thank the member for some notice of this question. Compared with the estimates contained in the pre-election financial projections statement, actual government operating revenue was $355 million higher in 2000-01, $892 million higher in 2001-02, and $1 544 million higher in 2002-03. These increases primarily reflect large parameter-driven factors such as a stronger than expected oil price and property market, rather than government policy decisions. In this regard, revenue measures taken by this Government are estimated to have raised additional revenue of $23.5 million in 2001-02 and $243 million in 2002-03. Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
On behalf of the Minister for Racing and Gaming, I thank the member for some notice of this question. Compared with the estimates contained in the pre-election financial projections statement, actual government operating revenue was $355 million higher in 2000-01, $892 million higher in 2001-02, and $1 544 million higher in 2002-03. These increases primarily reflect large parameter-driven factors such as a stronger than expected oil price and property market, rather than government policy decisions. In this regard, revenue measures taken by this Government are estimated to have raised additional revenue of $23.5 million in 2001-02 and $243 million in 2002-03. Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Compared with the estimates contained in the pre-election financial projections statement, actual government operating revenue was $355 million higher in 2000-01, $892 million higher in 2001-02, and $1 544 million higher in 2002-03. These increases primarily reflect large parameter-driven factors such as a stronger than expected oil price and property market, rather than government policy decisions. In this regard, revenue measures taken by this Government are estimated to have raised additional revenue of $23.5 million in 2001-02 and $243 million in 2002-03. Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Importantly, the higher than expected revenue outcomes have been invested in priority areas such as health, education and law and order. In 2002-03 health expenditure was $485 million higher than estimated in the coalition Government’s last budget. Similarly, education and training spending was $231 million higher and police spending was higher by $57 million. The revenue increases also have assisted in delivering budget surpluses - including a surplus of $250 million in 2002-03, compared with an estimated deficit of $69 million in the PFPS - and reducing net debt. At 30 June 2003, total public sector net debt was $4 465 million, which is nearly $1 billion lower than the corresponding PFPS estimate. Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Over the last four years of the coalition Government, revenue rose from $7 892 million in 1996-97 to $9 693 million in 1999-2000, an increase of $1 801 million. This equates to an average annual growth rate over that period of 7.1 per cent or $600 million a year, boosted by windfalls from asset sales that were used to mask the deteriorating financial position. However, despite revenue flows, the coalition ran four consecutive general government operating deficits over the period 1996-97 to 1999-2000. Furthermore, in the PFPS, two more deficits were forecast for 2002-03 and 2003-04. Indeed, respected economic commentator Alan Wood’s assessment that Premier Richard Court’s brief flirtation - The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I think the member is going remarkably close to breaching standing orders. This appears to be an essay on the budgetary process and has nothing to do with the question. Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Thank you, Mr President, I concede that it was a very long answer to a very short but, nonetheless, a very broad question. I believe I have answered the question.
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.