Opposition questions the Premier's and Treasurer's conflicting statements regarding potential asset sales, particularly concerning Water Corporation, Western Power, and state ports. The Premier confirms some asset sales will occur to fund infrastructure, excluding key utilities and ports themselves.

AnsweredQoN 526Legislative Assembly
Asked
19 September 2013
Portfolio
Premier

QuestionView source ↗

STATE FINANCES — ASSET SALES
526. Mr M. McGOWAN to the Premier:
I refer to the Premier's
comments in the house yesterday, when he ruled out the sale of the Water
Corporation, Western Power and the state's ports, stating, ''We
will not do that''; and the Treasurer's response this morning when
asked whether the state's power and water utilities are up for review
to be sold, which was, ''Of course. Of course they are.''
(1) Is the Treasurer right or is the Premier right about
which assets might be sold?
(2) Will the
Premier confirm now which assets will or will not be sold?
(3) Has the
Premier not now, by announcing a fire sale of state assets, placed Western
Australia in a weak negotiating position for future sales?

AnswerView source ↗

(1)–(3) It could be weaker—the opposition
could be in charge of negotiations!
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Members!
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
Yesterday I foreshadowed that there will be some sale of assets, and there will
be. I look forward to the members opposite supporting us in that.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Members!
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
But as I said when asked that question in the lead-up to the last election, and
as I said yesterday, we will not be selling Western Power or Water Corporation
or Fremantle port. We will not be doing that, but we will sell some assets.
Some of those assets, for example in the cases of ports, may be assets within
the port, but we will not be selling the port. We have not even had that
discussion, but we are about to—it will be a very forthright discussion.
There will be extensive asset sales not only because of the downgrade by
Standard and Poor's yesterday, but also this state is spending $7 billion
or $8 billion a year on capital investment—on assets, projects and the
like—and as we continue as a state to accumulate more and more, there
is nothing particularly wrong with disposing some of the already established
and income-earning assets. There is a limit. The demands for new capital
infrastructure, whether it be in hospitals, in schools, in public transport, in
roads, in water supply or electricity supply is like a never-ending wish list,
so there is some logic and good sense in disposing of some already purchased,
established and operational assets and putting them out there. And who is going
to buy them? Superannuation funds on behalf of Australian superannuants. Is
there anything wrong with that? I do not think so! Meanwhile, we will continue
to build and acquire new assets.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more