❓ Mr. Dean asks about funding for an alternative tourism project proposed by several shires. Mr. Brown responds by criticizing the opposition's financial competence, stating no formal application has been received and mocking the idea of funding a project without a proposal.
AnsweredQoN 504Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to a question asked by the member for Warren-Blackwood in Parliament last week about why the Government had not funded a project that no longer exists and to an article that appeared in The West Australian on the following day in which the member was quoted as saying that the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. (1) Has the Government received a request from the Shires of Manjimup, Bridgetown-Greenbushes and Nannup to fund an alternative tourism project? (2) What consideration has been given to that request? Mr C.M. BROWN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop Government.
(1) Has the Government received a request from the Shires of Manjimup, Bridgetown-Greenbushes and Nannup to fund an alternative tourism project? (2) What consideration has been given to that request? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop Government.
(2) What consideration has been given to that request? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop Government.
Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop Government.
(1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop Government.
(1) Has the Government received a request from the Shires of Manjimup, Bridgetown-Greenbushes and Nannup to fund an alternative tourism project? (2) What consideration has been given to that request? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop Government.
(2) What consideration has been given to that request? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop Government.
Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop Government.
(1)-(2) Members are aware that last week the member for Warren-Blackwood distinguished himself by asking me a question about why the Government had not funded a project that was no longer viable and for which the proponents no longer seek funding. To try to get away from that rather embarrassing question that was reported in The West Australian the following day, the member was then reported to have said in The West Australian that even though that project does not exist, the Government should fund one of two alternative projects. He has put that on the record. That was an interesting comment because I had cause for my office to check whether the Government had received an application to fund one of those projects. Can members guess what? There is no application. The Government was asked to fund one of two projects for which no proposal has yet been received, about which the Government knows nothing and which we have never seen. However, according to the member for Warren-Blackwood we should write out a cheque and forward it on saying, “Happy birthday; we do not know what it is for but whatever it is, we hope it is pretty good”! Members opposite think they should be in government. Can members imagine it? It would be like a lotto result. People would check their letterbox each day and wonder whether the minister had sent them a cheque that day. They would not know what it was for or what any of the conditions were and, although they had not applied for anything, they would receive a cheque anyway! I want it put on the record that this is an example of the financial competence of members who aspire to sit on this side of the House. If that is the way they intend to look after taxpayers’ money, the taxpayers will be very keen to ensure that their money is not dissipated. They can assure that by re-electing the Gallop 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.