❓ Mr Day questions the Premier about funding for a PET scanner and other health projects, alleging broken promises. The Premier accuses the former government of financial irresponsibility and assures commitment to a PET project, properly financed.
AnsweredQoN 339Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER 339. Mr DAY to the Premier: In view of the answer just given by the Minister for Health, in which he said that the funds for the purchase of a positron emission tomography scanner had not been provided for in the forward estimates, whereas, in reality, all of the $7.5 million was made available by the former Government from the proceeds of the sale of AlintaGas, and given that the Minister for Health has now broken his written promise to doctors and Western Australians alike to provide full funding for a PET scanner, I ask - (1) Will the Premier overrule his minister and guarantee that such vital technology for the people of Western Australia will be provided? (2) Will the Premier give an assurance that the balance of the $40 million allocated from the sale of AlintaGas by the former Government to health projects around Western Australia will in fact be provided? Dr GALLOP
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER
In view of the answer just given by the Minister for Health, in which he said that the funds for the purchase of a positron emission tomography scanner had not been provided for in the forward estimates, whereas, in reality, all of the $7.5 million was made available by the former Government from the proceeds of the sale of AlintaGas, and given that the Minister for Health has now broken his written promise to doctors and Western Australians alike to provide full funding for a PET scanner, I ask - (1) Will the Premier overrule his minister and guarantee that such vital technology for the people of Western Australia will be provided? (2) Will the Premier give an assurance that the balance of the $40 million allocated from the sale of AlintaGas by the former Government to health projects around Western Australia will in fact be provided? Dr GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
(1) Will the Premier overrule his minister and guarantee that such vital technology for the people of Western Australia will be provided? (2) Will the Premier give an assurance that the balance of the $40 million allocated from the sale of AlintaGas by the former Government to health projects around Western Australia will in fact be provided? Dr GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
(2) Will the Premier give an assurance that the balance of the $40 million allocated from the sale of AlintaGas by the former Government to health projects around Western Australia will in fact be provided? Dr GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Dr GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
(1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER
In view of the answer just given by the Minister for Health, in which he said that the funds for the purchase of a positron emission tomography scanner had not been provided for in the forward estimates, whereas, in reality, all of the $7.5 million was made available by the former Government from the proceeds of the sale of AlintaGas, and given that the Minister for Health has now broken his written promise to doctors and Western Australians alike to provide full funding for a PET scanner, I ask - (1) Will the Premier overrule his minister and guarantee that such vital technology for the people of Western Australia will be provided? (2) Will the Premier give an assurance that the balance of the $40 million allocated from the sale of AlintaGas by the former Government to health projects around Western Australia will in fact be provided? Dr GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
(1) Will the Premier overrule his minister and guarantee that such vital technology for the people of Western Australia will be provided? (2) Will the Premier give an assurance that the balance of the $40 million allocated from the sale of AlintaGas by the former Government to health projects around Western Australia will in fact be provided? Dr GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
(2) Will the Premier give an assurance that the balance of the $40 million allocated from the sale of AlintaGas by the former Government to health projects around Western Australia will in fact be provided? Dr GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Dr GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
(1)-(2) The current Government has every intention to get a PET project up and running here in Western Australia. There is a difference between this Government and the former Government. I will go through it. Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Mr Barnett: One was honest and the other is dishonest; that is the difference. Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Dr GALLOP: No, quite the opposite. Before the last election, we were told all about the laptop computers. However, when the Minister for Education examined the situation, he found that the current Leader of the Opposition had not properly funded that project in the budget of Western Australia. I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
I now turn to my colleague the Minister for Police. When she became Minister for Police, the you-beaut computer-aided dispatch and communications system for the police had not been budgeted for by the previous Government in the forward estimates of this State. The dishonesty of the previous Government reached its high point when it was advised before the election that there was a blow-out in the health budget. Did the previous Government tell the people of Western Australia? Did it consult with them about the problem? No, it did not. It is that dishonesty and that incompetence that we are dealing with in government. We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
We now have a Minister for Health who wants to get the PET machine into Western Australia, and he wants to make sure that when it is introduced into Western Australia - it will be - it is done on terms and conditions that are favourable to the State of Western Australia, and in a way that is properly financed. There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
There is a difference between the two sides of the House. The other side displayed total irresponsibility and dishonesty. However, we on this side will ensure that financial responsibility is at the core of our decision making. The other side was today exposed by Alan Wood of The Australian newspaper. The word was “profligacy”. The former Government spent money it did not have, did not tell the people about its financial commitments and was dishonest about the budget situation. Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Mr Barnett: We gave you a budget surplus - a mountain of money. Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Dr GALLOP: The Leader of the Opposition is the only person saying that. The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
The SPEAKER: Everyone knows that the Leader of the Opposition makes his point well. He does not need to make it several times by repeatedly interjecting. It is holding up question time. I ask the Premier to conclude. Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
Dr GALLOP: We are committed to financial responsibility. That is what I expect of my ministers; not the sloppy, irresponsible attitude displayed by the Leader of the Opposition. He could not manage the budget. The financial measures we put in place will ensure that he will not be in a position to get hold of the public purse after the next election.
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.