❓ Question on Notice regarding the discrepancy between the forecasted inflation rate and the increase in household fees and charges in the WA State Budget. The Treasurer defends the government's approach and accuses the opposition of hypocrisy.
AnsweredQoN 223Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
STATE BUDGET - INFLATION FORECAST
The Treasurer’s budget papers reveal a three per cent forecast rate of inflation for 2007-08, a rate that is clearly below the average 3.95 per cent increase in fees and charges for the typical household. (1) How can the Treasurer justify slugging households around $110 million more in fees and charges? (2) What happened to former Premier Geoff Gallop’s family pledge to keep these cost increases at or below the rate of inflation? Mr E.S. RIPPER
The Treasurer’s budget papers reveal a three per cent forecast rate of inflation for 2007-08, a rate that is clearly below the average 3.95 per cent increase in fees and charges for the typical household. (1) How can the Treasurer justify slugging households around $110 million more in fees and charges? (2) What happened to former Premier Geoff Gallop’s family pledge to keep these cost increases at or below the rate of inflation? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
(1) How can the Treasurer justify slugging households around $110 million more in fees and charges? (2) What happened to former Premier Geoff Gallop’s family pledge to keep these cost increases at or below the rate of inflation? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
(2) What happened to former Premier Geoff Gallop’s family pledge to keep these cost increases at or below the rate of inflation? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
(1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
(1) How can the Treasurer justify slugging households around $110 million more in fees and charges? (2) What happened to former Premier Geoff Gallop’s family pledge to keep these cost increases at or below the rate of inflation? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
(2) What happened to former Premier Geoff Gallop’s family pledge to keep these cost increases at or below the rate of inflation? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
(1)-(2) It is clear that, politically, the member will not be running off the half-back line initiating an attack at any near time in the future. The family pledge is intact. What we do is measure the costs that government businesses have actually incurred. Then we have to increase prices, which is regrettable, but we keep our level of price increases below the average level of price increases in the economy. We do not go out there and forecast price increases or cost increases, and then charge people on the basis of cost increases that we only guess at - that is, those that have not yet actually happened. We wait until the cost increases have occurred, and then we do not fully compensate for that impact on our businesses. If members read my 2003-04 budget speech, they will find that I explicitly talked about the comparison with recent inflation. Of course, the house has the advantage of having a copy of the memo sent to me from the Under Treasurer that confirms that the government has always measured household fees and charges against historical inflation. Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
Mr J.H.D. Day : The Treasurer should read his own media statements. Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : The member for Darling Range should read the memo from the Under Treasurer. The member for Darling Range can tell me whether he thinks the Under Treasurer is misleading the house. If he wants to make a statement that the Under Treasurer is misleading the house, he can go right ahead and do that, but I do not think he will. This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
This is the important point. When the member for Darling Range, the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition were members of cabinet, the other side of politics put up household fees and charges beyond the average level of price increases in the economy. Therefore, their impact on household fees and charges in the last five years of their government was $159 above what happened in the rest of the economy - above the inflation rate. For seven budgets in a row we have kept our increases - regrettable that they are - below the inflation rate. That is a benefit of $413 to the average representative household. The comparison between the two sides of politics is absolutely clear: with the coalition it is $159 above inflation but with Labor it is $413 below inflation. That is because we regret any price increases imposed on Western Australian households and we try to keep the impact on living standards as low as we can. We want the living standards of Western Australians to rise, and they are, courtesy of the booming Western Australian economy and a 2.7 per cent rate of unemployment.
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.