❓ Treasurer responds to question about the financial risks of 'open-cheque promises', criticising the opposition's proposed Kimberley canal project and its potential economic impact on WA.
AnsweredQoN 178Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
OPEN-CHEQUE PROMISES
Can the Treasurer please advise the Parliament of the risks posed to the state’s financial and economic position by open-cheque promises? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr E.S. RIPPER
Can the Treasurer please advise the Parliament of the risks posed to the state’s financial and economic position by open-cheque promises? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
It should always concern Western Australians when politicians pretend that cost does not matter. Members on our side understand this. However, the member for Cottesloe does not understand this, and neither do the novices whom he apparently mentors. The member for Cottesloe had a rush of blood to the head at the last election when he promised to build a canal from the Kimberley no matter what the risk or the cost. He expected that Western Australians would simply accept his brilliant idea, no matter what it would cost. He said that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. Yesterday he admitted on radio that he actually had in mind a $3 billion or $4 billion cost. However, what he told the people at the election was that his researched, well-developed figure was $2 billion. He was not alone on his side. The member for Vasse - now the Liberal Party spokesperson on financial matters - called this unfunded promise “Colin Barnett’s visionary canal project”. It was not so much a vision as a $14.5 billion nightmare! The Liberal Party’s costing was wrong, wrong, wrong by $12.5 billion! It was just $12.5 billion out as a minimum! Members might ask: why talk about this now? Was that not the last election? Surely the alternative government could not be that reckless again. Well, unfortunately, I think it could, because members opposite have not admitted fault. They still think that was the right thing to do. Also, courtesy of the member for Vasse, the Barnett faction is now back in charge of the Liberal Party! Until they come forward and admit that they got it wrong, and as long as the current Leader of the Opposition keeps reinforcing his party’s commitment to the canal project, Western Australians can only assume that the Liberal Party is still committed to this idea and that it is still committed to going to elections with visionary projects, no matter what the cost. I think it is important that Western Australians be made aware of the financial implications of this commitment. I will give the house two figures. If this project had proceeded, the net debt to revenue ratio would be 106 per cent - there goes the AAA credit rating! That figure is way above any figure that would have kept the state’s AAA credit rating. The cumulative interest cost by 2008-09 would have been $860 million! That is equivalent to building a major tertiary hospital or two new power stations. I asked earlier whether people thought that the project was still worth talking about. Unfortunately, the current Leader of the Opposition still has faith in this matter. In late March he declared on a morning radio program, according to my notes - It’s always been a dream of mine. I think the Kimberley pipeline one day will become a reality. The Liberals are still committed to this project, no matter what the cost, even when they know that it will cost a lot more than they pretended during the election campaign. I hope that it remains just a dream for the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the man who mentors them. I hope that it never becomes Western Australia’s worst ever financial nightmare. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next question?
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Are we all ready for the next 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.