❓ Hon Bill Stretch asks about a system of returning a percentage of state taxes and royalties to local authorities, referencing a system in some US states. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich acknowledges the issue but raises concerns about fairness and practicality, suggesting addressing inequities in Commonwealth funding as a better solution.
AnsweredQoN 1047Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Is the minister aware that some States in the United States, including Wyoming, which I visited recently, have a formalised system for returning a set percentage of certain state taxes and royalties to the local authorities and regions in which the taxable income was produced? (2) Will the minister set up a body to investigate this issue in the interests of pursuing an incentive-driven and more equitable distribution of revenue to local government and regional Western Australia? (3) Will the minister report to the House the outcome of any such investigations into the applicability and appropriateness of such a rebate scheme; and, if not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
(2) Will the minister set up a body to investigate this issue in the interests of pursuing an incentive-driven and more equitable distribution of revenue to local government and regional Western Australia? (3) Will the minister report to the House the outcome of any such investigations into the applicability and appropriateness of such a rebate scheme; and, if not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
(3) Will the minister report to the House the outcome of any such investigations into the applicability and appropriateness of such a rebate scheme; and, if not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
(1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
(2) Will the minister set up a body to investigate this issue in the interests of pursuing an incentive-driven and more equitable distribution of revenue to local government and regional Western Australia? (3) Will the minister report to the House the outcome of any such investigations into the applicability and appropriateness of such a rebate scheme; and, if not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
(3) Will the minister report to the House the outcome of any such investigations into the applicability and appropriateness of such a rebate scheme; and, if not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: (1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
(1)-(3) I am not aware of this happening in the United States; however, I am interested in the issue. Royalties from resource production were a little over $1.1 billion in the year to June 2003, and this contributed to Western Australia’s annual expenditure on infrastructure and services, such as health, education, training and the like. Some pressure is applied by regional local authorities, particularly those in areas with high levels of mining activity - namely, gas, oil, and iron ore production areas - as they argue that they contribute significantly in royalties to the Commonwealth Government in particular. As Hon Bill Stretch is aware, the Commonwealth Government then has the task of reallocating those moneys to the States based on a formula. Unfortunately, we tend to do worse than many of our eastern States counterparts. However, this is a very complex issue, in which the State has very limited jurisdiction. Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
Hon Bill Stretch: It is quite a considerable amount of money. The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
The PRESIDENT: Order! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Providing local governments with a proportion of royalty payments based on the royalties earned in each local government area would be unfair and illogical. It would also be very difficult to determine, because royalties are derived from less than 70 per cent of the State’s 142 local government areas, and those amounts are enormously varied. On what basis would equitable resource allocation across the 142 councils be assured, when 70 of them are defined as producing the major wealth and contributing to the gross state product? A better solution might be to address the inequity of the situation in which the Commonwealth Government collects $2 billion more each year from Western Australia than it spends on the State. Perhaps a better way of going about it would be to ensure that we get a fairer share of commonwealth royalties revenue, so that we can better look after the regions.
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.