❓ Mr. Graham questions the Treasurer about establishing a royalty fund similar to Alberta's, while Mr. Ripper highlights differences between the provinces and defends his government's financial management.
AnsweredQoN 180Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I listened to the Treasurer’s answer just now. I read with great interest the Treasurer’s comments on 12 September about his visit to the Province of Alberta, Canada, particularly the part in which he said that the Canadian experience sends a strong message to Western Australians. (1) Is the Treasurer aware that 26 years ago, the Alberta Government, being concerned that the high oil and gas revenues it was receiving were unsustainable, diverted some of those royalties into a state-operated investment fund? (2) Is the Treasurer aware that that fund is now worth in excess of $C11.8 billion and is used in various ways, such as reducing the burden of state taxation on Albertans? (3) If the Treasurer is aware of those things, will he now join me in seeking to have a similar fund established in Western Australia so that the regions and future generations can benefit from the mineral and petroleum royalty boom that this Government is enjoying? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
(1) Is the Treasurer aware that 26 years ago, the Alberta Government, being concerned that the high oil and gas revenues it was receiving were unsustainable, diverted some of those royalties into a state-operated investment fund? (2) Is the Treasurer aware that that fund is now worth in excess of $C11.8 billion and is used in various ways, such as reducing the burden of state taxation on Albertans? (3) If the Treasurer is aware of those things, will he now join me in seeking to have a similar fund established in Western Australia so that the regions and future generations can benefit from the mineral and petroleum royalty boom that this Government is enjoying? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
(2) Is the Treasurer aware that that fund is now worth in excess of $C11.8 billion and is used in various ways, such as reducing the burden of state taxation on Albertans? (3) If the Treasurer is aware of those things, will he now join me in seeking to have a similar fund established in Western Australia so that the regions and future generations can benefit from the mineral and petroleum royalty boom that this Government is enjoying? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
(3) If the Treasurer is aware of those things, will he now join me in seeking to have a similar fund established in Western Australia so that the regions and future generations can benefit from the mineral and petroleum royalty boom that this Government is enjoying? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
(1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
(1) Is the Treasurer aware that 26 years ago, the Alberta Government, being concerned that the high oil and gas revenues it was receiving were unsustainable, diverted some of those royalties into a state-operated investment fund? (2) Is the Treasurer aware that that fund is now worth in excess of $C11.8 billion and is used in various ways, such as reducing the burden of state taxation on Albertans? (3) If the Treasurer is aware of those things, will he now join me in seeking to have a similar fund established in Western Australia so that the regions and future generations can benefit from the mineral and petroleum royalty boom that this Government is enjoying? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
(2) Is the Treasurer aware that that fund is now worth in excess of $C11.8 billion and is used in various ways, such as reducing the burden of state taxation on Albertans? (3) If the Treasurer is aware of those things, will he now join me in seeking to have a similar fund established in Western Australia so that the regions and future generations can benefit from the mineral and petroleum royalty boom that this Government is enjoying? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
(3) If the Treasurer is aware of those things, will he now join me in seeking to have a similar fund established in Western Australia so that the regions and future generations can benefit from the mineral and petroleum royalty boom that this Government is enjoying? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
(1)-(2) The principal Canadian experience that impressed me was the cost shifting from the commonwealth Government in Canada to the Provinces on the question of health and the fact that health had ballooned as a proportion of the budget of Alberta and was threatening the Government’s ability to provide services in other areas. I took that away as an important lesson for us that we cannot let the Commonwealth off the hook when it comes to health expenditure. With regard to royalties, there are at least two differences between the position in Alberta and in Western Australia. Firstly, Western Australia produces a much broader range of commodities; therefore, we are not subject to quite the same volatility as Alberta. Secondly, Western Australia has the iniquitous Grants Commission process that equalises away 90 per cent of our royalty gains. Mr L. Graham interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: Over five years. I would very much like to be in Alberta’s financial position with regard to its royalties and its commonwealth Government. Nevertheless, an important point underlies what the member for Pilbara has put; namely, that we should not just fritter away windfalls. That is what the previous Government did. It spent up to and then beyond the additional revenue that it received. That is why it had deficits in five out of eight budgets. We are containing expense growth; and when we get unexpected increases in revenue, that is immediately committed towards reducing our borrowings. Essentially that gives us a greater cushion of borrowing capacity for the future. We are taking up the spirit of what the member for Pilbara has put, because we intend to manage our finances in a sustainable way. We certainly do not want to get into the situation that we had under the former Government.
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.