❓ Opposition questions the government about funding cuts, increased staffing at the Rottnest Island Authority, and potential price hikes for family accommodation. The Minister deflects blame, citing previous government decisions and increased operational costs.
AnsweredQoN 409Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to proposed price hikes that may see Western Australians paying an additional 30 per cent for family accommodation on Rottnest Island. (1) Will the minister confirm that this Government has slashed total funding to the Rottnest Island Authority by more than $1 million in its last two budgets? (2) Will the minister also confirm that this Government has employed an additional 34 public servants at the Rottnest Island Authority over the past two years, nearly doubling its total staff numbers? (3) Will the minister admit that the proposed price increases are the result of this Government’s decision to cut funding and overload the governing body with more bureaucrats? Mr C.M. BROWN
AnswerView source ↗
(1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(1) Will the minister confirm that this Government has slashed total funding to the Rottnest Island Authority by more than $1 million in its last two budgets? (2) Will the minister also confirm that this Government has employed an additional 34 public servants at the Rottnest Island Authority over the past two years, nearly doubling its total staff numbers? (3) Will the minister admit that the proposed price increases are the result of this Government’s decision to cut funding and overload the governing body with more bureaucrats? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(2) Will the minister also confirm that this Government has employed an additional 34 public servants at the Rottnest Island Authority over the past two years, nearly doubling its total staff numbers? (3) Will the minister admit that the proposed price increases are the result of this Government’s decision to cut funding and overload the governing body with more bureaucrats? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(3) Will the minister admit that the proposed price increases are the result of this Government’s decision to cut funding and overload the governing body with more bureaucrats? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(1) Will the minister confirm that this Government has slashed total funding to the Rottnest Island Authority by more than $1 million in its last two budgets? (2) Will the minister also confirm that this Government has employed an additional 34 public servants at the Rottnest Island Authority over the past two years, nearly doubling its total staff numbers? (3) Will the minister admit that the proposed price increases are the result of this Government’s decision to cut funding and overload the governing body with more bureaucrats? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(2) Will the minister also confirm that this Government has employed an additional 34 public servants at the Rottnest Island Authority over the past two years, nearly doubling its total staff numbers? (3) Will the minister admit that the proposed price increases are the result of this Government’s decision to cut funding and overload the governing body with more bureaucrats? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(3) Will the minister admit that the proposed price increases are the result of this Government’s decision to cut funding and overload the governing body with more bureaucrats? Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
Mr C.M. BROWN replied: (1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(1) The position with the Rottnest Island Authority is that the board produced a draft management plan, as it is required to do, under the Rottnest Island Authority Act. That was produced about four months ago, I think. That draft management plan flagged the fact that there would be price increases to cope with the increased costs the Rottnest Island Authority was facing. (2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(2) It is true that the staffing at the authority has increased, and that has been for a couple of reasons. One is that a decision was made - I am awaiting advice on when that decision was made, but I think it was made by my predecessors - to take over and run the Rottnest Island Hotel. The second decision was to run the bike hire service on Rottnest Island. Both of those decisions had the effect of increasing the number of employees at the authority. (3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
(3) It is interesting that the costs have increased steadily over the past few years. In 1998-99, compared with 1999-2000, during the time of my predecessors, costs increased by $2.5 million. In the following financial year, when the coalition Government was in power for seven months and the current Government was in power for five months, costs increased by $4.5 million; and in 2001-02, the costs increased by $2.5 million. I understand that there were some increases on Rottnest Island in 2000 to compensate for the effects of the goods and services tax, but there was no revenue flow to the Rottnest Island Authority from those increases. They were simply tax measures to comply with the GST. The last increases on the island, under the last management plan, were in 1998. It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
It is always regrettable when fees must be increased. However, the Rottnest Island Authority continues to work on these matters and will continue to ensure that the island has sufficient income to meet its obligations under the Act.
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.